Didn't read the article but the first thing that jumps out in the blurb is that the young man is NOT his son, but another relative. Supreme Court Justices make decent money, but not that much when compared to so many others (nor should they, imo) so someone who is very wealthy paying for this young man's education doesn't seem to be an issue to me. UNLESS of course, Thomas was making court decisions that pertained to that person. If not, it would be fine imo.
Didn't read the article but the first thing that jumps out in the blurb is that the young man is NOT his son, but another relative. Supreme Court Justices make decent money, but not that much when compared to so many others (nor should they, imo) so someone who is very wealthy paying for this young man's education doesn't seem to be an issue to me. UNLESS of course, Thomas was making court decisions that pertained to that person. If not, it would be fine imo.
The srticles states: 'the Crows “are among our dearest friends”...' Are justices not allowed besties who want to bless a relative?