And then last night, Crow's attorneys sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee telling them that the Committee does not have "the authority to investigate Mr. Crow's personal friendship with Justice Clarence Thomas" because Congress doesn't have the power to "impose ethics rules and standards on the Supreme Court."N.E. Brigand wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 5:50 pm Yesterday The Atlantic published a profile of and interview with Justice Clarence Thomas's friend and benefactor, Harlan Crow. Here's a sample:
Surely, I suggested, he could have structured the deal in a way that would not have involved writing a personal check to a Supreme Court justice. Create a foundation for public education, put impartial trustees on its board, and let it buy the house. Crow said he had done many deals in his life, and every one could, in retrospect, have been done a little better. This one wasn’t even a bad one, let alone corrupt. “It was a fair-market transaction, and I had a purpose,” Crow said. “I don’t see the foot fault.” But the idea that he had secretly corrupted his friend left him aghast. (I asked him whether he had any other financial relationships with Thomas or anyone related to Thomas, and he declined to answer, saying he doesn’t keep track of the hospitality extended to friends.)
(Edit: Mark Joseph Stern has posted the whole letter here.)