Justices Speak, and Are Greeted With Dissent

To the Editor:

Re “In Rare Remarks, Thomas Denounces Public Scrutiny Facing His Family” (news article, May 12):

At a recent judicial conference, Justice Clarence Thomas complained bitterly about “the nastiness and the lies” about him and his wife, Ginni, in the last few years.

And yet, these are the facts: He accepted lavish gifts from powerful friends and failed to report them. His wife was indisputably involved in an attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power from one president to the duly elected new one. But somehow to report these facts, and to criticize the Thomases for their behavior, is nasty and “hideous.”

He discussed his goal of making the court more representative of the country by hiring law clerks from non-Ivy League schools. Perfectly reasonable. Indeed, that concept has another name: diversity, equity and inclusion. Which Justice Thomas plainly detests when applied to minorities, because (I guess) he believes that it belittles the accomplishments of those who receive a helping hand.

I’ve doubted Justice Thomas’s judgment in the past; now I doubt his advocacy skills in general. Because his arguments are self-pitying and unpersuasive.

Stephen J. Bubul
Minneapolis

To the Editor:

Justice Clarence Thomas’s comment about the nastiness and lies he and his wife have faced really corroborates a bias he has demonstrated as a justice in favor of right-wing positions.

He has always been bitter about the way that Democrats conducted his confirmation hearings, and I feel certain he holds them solely responsible for “the nastiness and the lies” he’s complaining about now.