[ad_1]
Discover critical journalism stories by subscribing to ProPublica’s The Big Story newsletter.
Series Focus: Supreme Court and Benefactors:Interactions Between SCOTUS Justices and Wealthy Donors
Questions regarding Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ enduring camaraderie with magnate Harlan Crow and Justice Samuel Alito’s opulent journeys with tycoon Paul Singer have surfaced, scrutinizing the possible impacts of such relationships on the integrity of the Supreme Court.
The report by the Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats has shed new light on billionaire Harlan Crow’s financial support for Supreme Justice Clarence Thomas through at least three undisclosed trips via private aircraft.
These flights, confirmed through Crow’s attorney’s submissions to the committee, facilitated travel for Thomas to various locations, including areas close to Montana’s Glacier National Park and his hometown in Georgia.
The probe by the committee was initiated by ProPublica’s investigative reports last year revealing a series of gifts from Crow to Thomas. These benefits include covering a relative’s private school fees and nearly annual luxurious getaways stretching over two decades. A subpoena for details from Crow was approved last November by the Democratic members of the committee although it wasn’t enforced. Instead, agreement was reached with Crow’s legal team for the required information.
A comprehensive report of the committee’s findings is anticipated to be published later in the summer, according to the office of Senator Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the committee’s chairman.
Sen. Durbin expressed that the discoveries made from the inquiry highlight the Supreme Court’s dire need for a mandatory code of ethical conduct. He observed that the investigation has provided the public with a more transparent understanding of the Court’s ethical violations.
Crow’s representatives have indicated that he cooperated and provided the committee with information regarding the previous seven years, and the committee has agreed to conclude its inquiry with respect to Mr. Crow.
Justice Thomas has not offered any immediate remarks following these revelations.
The disclosure of these additional trips underscores Justice Thomas’ recurring modality of travel, resembling the luxurious mobility of the ultra-rich. Crow’s fleet includes the premier Bombardier Global 5000, an aircraft with charter costs exceeding $10,000 per hour of flight, based on estimates from the charter industry. Records show that Justice Thomas has made round trips utilizing Crow’s jet within the same day.
The origination of the affiliation between Thomas and Crow dates back to 1996, when they first interacted during a flight to Dallas for a speaking engagement of the justice, as recounted by Crow. Since then, Crow has transported Thomas to global destinations.
The summary released by the Senate doesn’t elaborate on the objectives of the flights, but only denotes their dates and destinations. Instances include a flight from St. Louis to Kalispell, Montana in May 2017, and ultimately to Dallas. During this timeframe, Thomas was scheduled for a bar association presentation in St. Louis.
On one occasion, Justice Thomas flew from the East Coast to San Jose, California, and back again on June 29, 2021. Additionally, he completed a round trip from Washington, D.C. to Savannah, Georgia on March 23, 2019.
Specified public engagements of Justice Thomas in Montana, Georgia, or California on the listed dates have not been identified by ProPublica.
After the push by Senate Democrats in May of last year for comprehensive disclosure of Crow’s interactions and gifts to Supreme Court justices, the Democrats further applied pressure by approving a subpoena in November. This was met with brisk opposition from Republican Senators on the committee, leading to a protest walkout.
The committee has also sought information from conservative jurist Leonard Leo, who not only joined Thomas on journeys with Crow but also organized a lavish fishing excursion for Justice Samuel Alito that was financed by political contributors. Leo has publicly stated his refusal to adhere to the terms of the subpoena.
Following a surge of public scrutiny over ethical controversies, the Supreme Court adopted, for the first time, an ethics code in the previous autumn. However, this code does not include a method of enforcement.
This Wednesday saw an attempt by Senate Democrats to introduce legislation aimed at strengthening the ethics guidelines of the court and to establish a mechanism for examining potential misconduct allegations. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., criticized the proposed bill as an “unconstitutional overreach” and led other Republican senators in blocking its progression.
Last week, Justice Thomas conceded that he should have reported Crow-sponsored meals and accommodations during two vacations, both initially exposed by ProPublica. Although he has not recorded the recent private jet travels from Crow, which some legal scholars deem in breach of federal financial disclosure requirements, Thomas claims the omission of these trips in prior filings was an oversight. Thomas’ attorney insists that disclosure of the complimentary flights was unnecessary.
[ad_2]
FAQs – Inquiries about the Senate’s Findings on Justice Clarence Thomas and Harlan Crow
What did the Senate Judiciary Committee uncover about Justice Clarence Thomas and Harlan Crow?
The committee found that billionaire donor Harlan Crow provided Justice Clarence Thomas with at least three undisclosed private jet trips to various destinations. This revelation adds to a series of previously undisclosed gifts detailed by ProPublica investigations.
Has the Supreme Court implemented a code of conduct in response to these revelations?
Yes, the Supreme Court adopted an ethics code for the first time ever following the exposés and public outcry. However, this code lacks an enforcement mechanism.
Did Justice Thomas respond to the findings?
Justice Clarence Thomas has not provided an immediate response to the latest disclosures about his trips funded by Harlan Crow.
What are the implications of these trips on the justice’s financial disclosure requirements?
Some legal scholars argue that Justice Thomas not reporting these private jet trips is in violation of federal financial disclosure laws. Thomas and his attorney contend that there was no need to report these flights.
What actions have Senate Democrats taken in the wake of these findings?
Senate Democrats moved to pass a bill to tighten the court’s ethics rules and create a process for fielding and investigating allegations of possible misconduct. However, this effort was blocked by Republican senators.
