Clarence Thomas appoints Supreme Court clerks amidst the ongoing saga involving Crystal Clanton, a rising figure in conservative circles who has faced credible accusations of extreme racism. This situation took a new turn recently with a detailed exploration of her close relationship with Clarence and Ginni Thomas, courtesy of the New York Times. Described as a “nearly adopted daughter” to the Thomases, Clanton has secured a clerkship with Justice Clarence Thomas this fall, with several prominent jurists vouching for her character as she advances within conservative circles. The Times report sheds light on how the Thomases have assisted her in rehabilitating her reputation following a racism scandal, welcoming her into their inner circle.

In a recent discussion on the Slate Plus bonus segment of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern delved into the latest developments surrounding Clanton. They pondered the extraordinary string of fortunate events that seem to have propelled Clanton’s career, from living with the Thomases to securing prestigious clerkships despite allegations against her. Stern remarked on the sheer luck seemingly at play, while Lithwick highlighted the inconsistencies in Clanton’s defenders’ claims.

The discussion also touched on Clarence Thomas’s penchant for selecting ideologically aligned clerks and grooming them for influential positions within the legal sphere. Stern pointed out the trajectory of previous Thomas clerks who have risen to prominence within conservative circles, indicating Clanton could follow a similar path.

Both commentators expressed bewilderment at the seemingly casual manner in which the Thomases wield influence over judicial appointments, likening it to a casual offering of privileges. They also critiqued the assertions made by figures like Mark Paoletta, who defended Clanton by invoking Clarence Thomas’s judgment, despite the inherent conflicts of interest.

Ultimately, the conversation highlighted the stark contrast between serious legal discussions, such as recusal considerations, and the more superficial focus on personal connections and favors within influential circles.