The Nomination

ABOUT THE MAN: Clarence Thomas * Born: June 23, 1948, in Savannah, Ga. * Married to the former Virginia Bess Lamp, now deputy assistant secretary of labor for congressional and intergovernmental affairs. EDUCATION: * Attended Immaculate Conception Seminary, Conception Junction, Mo., 1967-68. * Received his bachelor of arts degree in 1971 from Holy Cross College, in Worcester, Mass. * Received law degree in 1974 from Yale University Law School, New Haven, Conn. EXPERIENCE: * Currently: circuit judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. * 1982-90: served as chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. * 1981-82: assistant U.S. secretary of education for civil rights. * 1981: consultant, Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Education Department. * 1979-81: legislative assistant to Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.). * 1977-79: attorney, Monsanto Co., St. Louis. * 1974-77: assistant attorney general, state of Missouri. THE TIMETABLE: * Hearings begin Tuesday. * Thomas to testify Tuesday through Friday. * Outside witnesses testify next week. * Judiciary Committee will probably vote seven to 10 days after hearings close. Nomination then goes to the Senate floor for a vote. * The Supreme Court term opens Oct. 7. THE ISSUES: * Affirmative action. The Supreme Court has said blacks, Latinos or other minorities may be given preferences in jobs, contracts and schooling. Thomas has denounced “racial preference schemes” that benefit minorities. * Abortion. Thomas has not stated an explicit view on abortion, but he has praised conservative writings that endorse “a right to life” for fetuses. * Separation of powers. Thomas sharply criticized a 1988 Supreme Court ruling that upheld the independent counsel who investigated the Iran-Contra defendants. * Enforcement of federal civil rights laws. Critics contend that as chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Thomas refused to enforce laws against age discrimination. * Natural law. Unlike recent judicial nominees, Thomas contends that the high court should uphold principles of “higher law”--such as the notion that “all men are created equal.” While this view is unobjectionable, natural law has been disparaged because it is so unpredictable. In the 19th Century, natural law was used to argue that women are naturally inferior to men or that Southern planters had a natural right to own slaves. * Property rights. Thomas has criticized the Supreme Court for not upholding economic and property rights during the last 55 years.