Full Breakdown
Clarence Thomas Recalls Yale Law School Banter with Justice Samuel Alito
8/27/2026, 10:54:03 PM
A Podcast Anecdote About Yale Law School
In a recent interview on the “Verdict with Ted Cruz” podcast, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recounted a light-hearted exchange with fellow Justice Samuel Alito concerning why the two never formed a friendship while attending Yale Law School. The conversation was also mentioned during Thomas’s appearance on “The Will Cain Show.”
The Recalled Conversation
“So I said, 'Sam, how come we were there two years together? Why weren't we friends?'” — Court Justice Clarence Thomas Alito’s reply, as Thomas reported, was that Thomas was “scary.” Thomas added that Alito explained his own appearance in law school—wearing bib overalls and combat boots—and expressed relief that phones for taking many pictures were not yet common.
Key Figures
- Clarence Thomas – Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, former Yale Law student.
- Samuel Alito – Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Yale Law alumnus who graduated a year after Thomas.
- Ted Cruz – Republican U.S. Senator from Texas, interview host who prompted the discussion.
Verbatim Quotes
- “He was a year behind you. But you didn't know each other,” — Sen. Ted Cruz “He was a year behind you. But you didn't know each other,” — Sen. Ted Cruz
- “So I said, 'Sam, how come we were there two years together? Why weren't we friends?'” — Justice Clarence Thomas “So I said, 'Sam, how come we were there two years together? Why weren't we friends?'” — Court Justice Clarence Thomas
- “He journeyed to become an extraordinary thinker,” — Sen. Ted Cruz “He journeyed to become an extraordinary thinker,” — Sen. Ted Cruz
Reception and Commentary
Senator Cruz described Thomas as having shifted from a “left-wing radical” in college to a conservative jurist, emphasizing the personal adversity Thomas overcame to reach the nation’s highest court. The anecdote was presented as a humorous glimpse into the justices’ law-school years rather than a substantive legal discussion. As the source is a commentary interview, the recollection reflects personal memory rather than independently verified fact.
