Clarence Thomas Will Not Escape The Collective Judgment Of History - Honolulu Civil Beat

Power local, independent journalism with a gift today and help us reach our goal of $250,000 by December 31.

Thanks to 634 donors, we've raised $96,000 so far!

Donate

Power local, independent journalism with a gift today and help us reach our goal of $250,000 by December 31.

Thanks to 634 donors, we've raised $96,000 so far!

Donate


About the Author

Will Weinstein

Will Weinstein has been in the financial world for almost 60 years, including running brokerage firms and hedge funds. He began teaching ethics25 years ago at various venues in the United States as well as in China, Vietnam and Australia. For the last 19 years Weinstein has been teaching "Ethics and Integrity in the Real World" at the University of Hawaii's Richardson School of Law and Shidler School of Business. He founded the very popular Weinstein Conversation Series, which brought in top legal, political and business personalities from around the world for interactive presentations open to the public.

We would condemn this behavior if it belonged to an ordinary member of the universe rather than a Supreme Court justice.

To ordinary people who strive to get along in the everyday world, the Clarence Thomas saga is surreal. What he did, as reported widely, is not only beyond our imaginations, it’s really quite sad. 

Politics and opinion aside, it’s particularly upsetting because the one thing we all expect from our highest court is ethical behavior.

What’s really crazy and almost impossible to comprehend is why all the focus seems to be solely on a legal analysis: whether or not his aberrant behavior violated any specific laws, and the minutiae about what exactly he was required to report.

The press and the legal pundits are hung up on all the fancy nuances involved which would potentially disqualify him. What and when was he required to report, etc.? 

When does common sense enter the equation and we begin to look at his misdeeds through a moral lens? Is this the way we want our children, friends, and associates to act?

Why is so little attention being paid to what matters most? Are we ignoring the most obvious questions people are asking?

As someone involved in the study, practice, and teaching of ethics, we carefully try to consider the enormous differences between our moral and legal worlds. Can some laws actually provide absolution from having to think and act ethically?

Washington DC Supreme Court Building.
The U.S. Supreme Court Building. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat/2017)

Can the law be conveniently used to protect and justify unethical practices? Can it be a comforting shield that provides justification and actual cover to the offenses and offenders?

There are countless examples of this throughout present and past history but perhaps the most stark illustration of what I’m talking about is the perfectly legal annihilation of so many people during the second world war. Here the law actually encouraged and protected those perpetuating the Holocaust.

We teach that ethical behavior begins with moral courage.  When you identify an ethical dilemma, think it through carefully, using as much data as you can possibly gather and look for a solution which considers all sides, angles, perspective.

‘What Would Superman Do?’

Search for a practical answer, but be certain it conforms to your ethical values. Ask some simple questions. Does it pass the smell test? How does it look to others?

How would you justify it to your mother, to your kid sitting on your shoulder? How would you feel if you woke up and saw your decision or action prominently displayed on the front page of your favorite newspaper?

Will it stand the test of time? One of my personal favorites is: “What would Superman do?”

We believe that honesty is absolutely essential to the successful continuance of society as we know it. We have moved way past “ethical relativism.” “It depends” is largely absent from our vocabulary. 

Ethics is a way of life in which the rules apply everywhere. We recognize that there are many shared values that help define moral behavior, but perhaps some of the simplest, most important, and most consensual are compassion, respect, fairness, humility, and responsibility.  Feel free to add your own.

A noted scholar at the University of Texas teaches us that ethics is a way of life, that the rules apply everywhere and determine the legitimacy of everything we do. They ask simply, “Can I, should I, do it?” They require us to distinguish between what I have a right to do and what is right to do.

Herein lies the hypocrisy of this entire controversy. We would condemn this behavior if it belonged to an ordinary member of the universe, even if he weren’t one of the most powerful people, determining crucial aspects of all of our lives.

What he has done is impossible to ignore or excuse. The women and men who fight every day to do the right thing must be honored and respected.

Ethics is a way of life in which the rules apply everywhere.

The example he is setting is scarily negative and if all of us were to follow it, would lead to total chaos and an end to democratic capitalism as we know it. The common refrain is some version of: “Of course he is guilty, but nothing will happen.”

Is that the outcome that we as a society find acceptable? While the legalese may prevail for the moment over what we all recognize as common-sense thinking, Justice Thomas will never escape the collective judgment of history.

Community Voices aims to encourage broad discussion on many topics of community interest. It’s kind of a cross between Letters to the Editor and op-eds. This is your space to talk about important issues or interesting people who are making a difference in our world. Column lengths should be no more than 800 words and we need a photo of the author and a bio. We welcome video commentary and other multimedia formats. Send to news@civilbeat.org. The opinions and information expressed in Community Voices are solely those of the authors and not Civil Beat.


Read this next:

Proposed Raises For Honolulu City Officials Are Offensive


Local reporting when you need it most

Support timely, accurate, independent journalism.

Honolulu Civil Beat is a nonprofit organization, and your donation helps us produce local reporting that serves all of Hawaii.

Contribute

About the Author

Will Weinstein

Will Weinstein has been in the financial world for almost 60 years, including running brokerage firms and hedge funds. He began teaching ethics25 years ago at various venues in the United States as well as in China, Vietnam and Australia. For the last 19 years Weinstein has been teaching "Ethics and Integrity in the Real World" at the University of Hawaii's Richardson School of Law and Shidler School of Business. He founded the very popular Weinstein Conversation Series, which brought in top legal, political and business personalities from around the world for interactive presentations open to the public.


Latest Comments (0)

The SC is deincentivised to change…, no loss to equate into the equation

maryc · 6 months ago

It’s time for a closer look at the conflict-of-interest that is occurring in HI State Courts. HI State Court Judges are State Employees and MUST be members in the HI State Employees Ret. Fund (ERS). This fund invests heavily in Mortgage-backed Securities (MBS) which are controlled by The Bank of New York Mellon, as custodian, a Wall Street inv. bank. This portion of the fund is not protected (insured) from loss. So, Judges’ rulings in foreclosure cases, have a direct impact on their pocketbook. Nearly every case alleges the Plaintiff is a MBS trust. So, the judges of course, rule in favor of the Plaintiff "bank" and their retirement. Homes are being stripped from citizens in favor of "banks" with no right to foreclose but they win due to most homeowner’s inability to defend themselves in a lawsuit. Finding an attorney is difficult, if you can afford one. "We would condemn this behavior if it belonged to an ordinary member of the universe…" Shouldn’t the same apply here? The solution: State Judges need to A) Not hear foreclosure cases involving MBS or B) the HI ERS they participate in, must cease all investing in MBS. It’s pretty simple, if someone would just take an interest.

Aloha808 · 6 months ago

Politics and opinion aside, it’s particularly upsetting because the one thing we all expect from our highest court is ethical behavior.This is all about politics. It's well known that all members of the Supreme Court have accepted trips and gifts. Both Liberal AND Conservative. This is all about politics.

Annoyed · 6 months ago

Join the conversation

About IDEAS

IDEAS is the place you'll find essays, analysis and opinion on every aspect of life and public affairs in Hawaii. We want to showcase smart ideas about the future of Hawaii, from the state's sharpest thinkers, to stretch our collective thinking about a problem or an issue. Email news@civilbeat.org to submit an idea.

Mahalo!

You're officially signed up for our daily newsletter, the Morning Beat. A confirmation email will arrive shortly.

In the meantime, we have other newsletters that you might enjoy. Check the boxes for emails you'd like to receive.

  • What's this? Be the first to hear about important news stories with these occasional emails.
  • What's this? You'll hear from us whenever Civil Beat publishes a major project or investigation.
  • What's this? Get our latest environmental news on a monthly basis, including updates on Nathan Eagle's 'Hawaii 2040' series.
  • What's this? Get occasional emails highlighting essays, analysis and opinion from IDEAS, Civil Beat's commentary section.

Inbox overcrowded? Don't worry, you can unsubscribe
or update your preferences at any time.