Democratic Rep. James Clyburn now says he regrets supporting Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court and is pushing to add four more justices, a move critics warn would politicize America’s highest court even further.
Appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press, longtime South Carolina congressman James Clyburn told host Kristen Welker that his backing of Clarence Thomas during the 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearings was “a mistake.” Clyburn said he had believed Thomas’s background and experience would lead him to uphold key civil-rights precedents, but now claims Thomas has “rebelled” against those values. He also called for expanding the Court from nine to thirteen justices, saying, “Thirteen is a pretty good number. A baker’s dozen would be a good number to have on the court.”
Clyburn’s about-face marks a sharp reversal from his earlier position. In 1991, he supported Thomas’s nomination, expecting Thomas to honor the legacy of decisions such as Brown v Board of Education. “I had faith and confidence in the fact that his background and experiences would instruct him in his professionalism, especially sitting on the bench,” Clyburn said. “I thought, sure, that he would be here upholding those precedents set down in 1954 in the Brown v Board of Education decision.” Now, Clyburn claims, “That was a mistake on my part. And I own up to it.”
He accused Thomas of abandoning his personal history and the struggles of his upbringing. “He was raised by his grandfather, and he has shown very little sensitivity to the environment his grandfather grew up down in Pin Point, Georgia,” Clyburn stated. “I had no idea that Clarence Thomas would rebel the way he has against his own background and experiences.” He charged that Thomas had shifted “all the way from an angry leftist, to a very angry rightist.”
Clyburn’s remarks come as prominent Democrats, including former Vice President Kamala Harris in July, have revived calls to expand the Supreme Court to thirteen justices. Clyburn publicly backed the idea, saying, “I would hope we would get people on the court who will follow the constitutional underpinnings of this great nation of ours. I had hoped that Clarence Thomas would follow the underpinnings of that constitution of ours, but he has not done so.” He argued that a larger bench would better reflect the country’s diversity and values.
For years, progressives have floated “court-packing” as a response to recent Supreme Court rulings they oppose, including the Court’s decisions to overturn federal abortion protections and to end affirmative action in higher education. Clyburn’s comments on this front echo that growing sentiment within his party. “Thirteen is a pretty good number,” he insisted.
Despite his support for court expansion, Clyburn said it should not be the top priority if Democrats regain the House in November. He argued that, instead, the first order of business ought to be “developing an accessible and affordable campaign effort that will yield what I will call making this country, its greatness, accessible and affordable for all of its citizens.” Clyburn dismissed immediate moves to expand the Court or impeach former President Donald Trump as misplaced priorities.
Driving much of this Democratic push is frustration over Supreme Court decisions seen as rolling back progressive priorities. The Guardian noted that the Court’s recent majority has “issued decisions overturning federal protections for abortion and ending affirmative action in higher education.” Clyburn’s remarks make clear that his regret over Thomas is rooted in disappointment with the justice’s votes on these issues, and more broadly, his rejection of the left’s preferred legal outcomes. (The Guardian reported.)
But the facts remain: Clarence Thomas rose from humble beginnings, served as chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and has served as an associate justice since his 1991 confirmation. While Clyburn now disavows his support, Thomas has never hidden his originalist approach to constitutional law, a philosophy that often runs counter to the progressive agenda.
Clyburn’s public regret is telling: when a justice fails to deliver the outcomes Democrats demand, the answer is to recreate the rules and tilt the balance in their favor. For all the claims about constitutional principles, the push to expand the Supreme Court is about political power, plain and simple. And that is a mistake America cannot afford.
