Whitehouse argued in support of his proposed legislation to create a code of ethics for the court, while highlighting more than a decade of failed oversight where Clarence Thomas is concerned. But Whitehouse was smart to begin with the most egregious elephant in the room: Thomas’ refusal to recuse himself from the first Jan. 6 committee case. The most important question around that situation was never even pursued: When did Justice Thomas become aware of his wife Ginny’s “insurrection activities”? Whitehouse calls it “a coverup in plain view” and says that “the Supreme Court, alone among federal courts, is okay with that.”
Whitehouse proceeds to break down how bogus Thomas’ claims are:
First problem: Private jet travel is not in the personal hospitality exemption, which is limited to food, lodging, and entertainment. Exhibit seven. Some textualist, by the way. Second problem: Thomas said it was okay because he’d asked colleagues, but that financial disclosure committee, it’s there to ask about financial disclosure. Setting aside that its name should give a clue, Thomas knew the committee existed because concerns about his yacht and jet travel gifts from this billionaire were referred there in 2011.
After some of these gifts were first revealed in this New York Times story, exhibit nine. Third problem: There’s no legal way not to disclose the property acquisition in Georgia. Fourth problem: Some of this personal hospitality involves people dedicated to turning the court into a tool for right-wing billionaires, namely Leonard Leo. This guy doesn’t have business before the court.His business is the court.
This disclosure mess has again been referred to the Financial Disclosure Committee, which raises the question of the previous referral to that same committee of the same billionaire’s gifts to Thomas of yacht and jet travel. The rules seem to require the committee to report its findings to the judicial conference. The records of the judicial conference are public, and the records of the judicial conference contain no mention of any such report.
So what became of the 2011 referral? Did anyone intervene? Is the committee still considering the 2011 referral more than a decade later? There is much yet to learn, which is why last week I sent a letter to the courts asking for further answers. Exhibit 10. Three things are needed to fix all this: better enforcement, better recusal rules, and better disclosures. My bill would do all three.
The sad thing is that as more stories come out, the only distinguishing characteristic that Thomas seems to have in comparison with his fellow conservative judges is that he’s been there the longest.
RELATED STORIES:
The rot in the Supreme Court goes beyond Clarence and Ginni Thomas
The next chapter in the Thomas-Crow Affair: Shady real estate deals putting money in Thomas’ pocket
Justice Clarence Thomas has reported up to $750,000 in income from a company that doesn’t exist
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries goes in on Clarence Thomas and it gets serious fast
Dimitri of WarTranslated has been doing the essential work of translating hours of Russian and Ukrainian video and audio during the invasion of Ukraine. He joins Markos and Kerry from London to talk about how he began this work by sifting through various sources. He is one of the only people translating information for English-speaking audiences. Dimitri’s followed the war since the beginning and has watched the evolution of the language and dispatches as the war has progressed.
Walter Einenkel
Source link
