Congressman James Clyburn of South Carolina, a senior House Democrat, said his decision more than three decades ago to support Clarence Thomas for a seat on the US supreme court “was a mistake” and urged expanding the court to 13 justices, according to an interview reported by the Guardian.
Clyburn said Thomas, who joined the court in 1991, had abandoned principles that once guided him and had become, in Clyburn’s words, an extremist member of the court’s hard-right bloc. The remarks, as reported, link Clyburn’s regret over his confirmation vote to his call for structural change at the nation’s highest court.
Clyburn Reassesses His 1991 Vote
Clyburn was one of the Democrats who voted to confirm Thomas to the supreme court when the Senate approved Thomas’s nomination in October 1991. At the time, Thomas was nominated by Republican President George H W Bush to replace retiring Justice Thurgood Marshall.
In comments cited by the Guardian, Clyburn said his support for Thomas “was a mistake,” directly revisiting that decision in light of Thomas’s record on the bench. Clyburn linked his reassessment to what he described as Thomas’s move away from earlier principles, saying the justice had shifted into an extremist, hard-right posture on the court.
The Guardian report did not quote the full exchange or provide a transcript, but it characterized Clyburn’s remarks as a clear break with his past stance on Thomas’s nomination.
Criticism of Thomas’s Position on the Court
Clyburn’s criticism focused on Thomas’s current role on the court rather than on the 1991 confirmation hearings themselves, according to the Guardian. The congressman said Thomas had “abandoned his principles” and now sits firmly in the court’s hard-right wing.
The Guardian report did not spell out which specific cases or opinions Clyburn cited to support his view. Instead, it summarized his assessment that Thomas had moved into an extremist position. That characterization reflects Clyburn’s judgment and is presented in the Guardian account as his interpretation of Thomas’s jurisprudence.
Call to Expand the Supreme Court to 13 Justices
Alongside his comments about Thomas, Clyburn called for expanding the supreme court from its current nine members to 13, the Guardian reported. He framed expansion as a necessary response to the court’s present direction, though the article did not detail a specific legislative proposal or timeline.
The Guardian account described Clyburn as arguing that a larger court would address what he sees as an imbalance on the bench. The report did not indicate that any bill tied directly to his remarks had been introduced in Congress at the time of publication.
Why Clyburn’s Shift Matters
Clyburn is one of the most senior Democrats in the House and a prominent voice within his party’s leadership. His public statement that his earlier support for Thomas “was a mistake,” as reported by the Guardian, is a notable reversal on a lifetime appointment that has shaped US law for more than 30 years.
By pairing that admission with a call to expand the court to 13 justices, Clyburn is not only revisiting a past vote but also pressing for structural change to the institution that vote helped shape. For readers, the key development is that a high-ranking Democrat is now openly linking regret over a specific confirmation decision to an argument for altering the size of the supreme court.
The Guardian report stands as the primary public account of Clyburn’s remarks in this news cycle. Independent corroboration of the full context and wording of his comments is limited so far and may develop as additional outlets report on the interview.
What to Watch Next
The immediate impact of Clyburn’s comments will depend on how other members of Congress respond and whether his call to expand the court attracts concrete legislative action. The Guardian report did not indicate that such a response had yet taken shape.
For now, the development is significant because it documents a senior Democrat publicly disavowing a past vote for a sitting justice and tying that regret to a push for a larger supreme court. Further reporting will show whether Clyburn’s position remains largely symbolic or becomes part of an organized effort to change the court’s structure.
