Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Wednesday, May 3, 2023

Justice Thomas's scandals abound:


Thomas Helped Kill Eviction Ban Threatening Benefactor’s Business 

Apr 25, 2023 • David Sirota , Rebecca Burns , Andrew Perez , Julia Rock & Matthew Cunningham-Cook 

Harlan Crow’s company said tenant protections threatened its profits. Thomas twice voted to end them while Crow lavished him with gifts.

"Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas voted to end federal tenant protections that his billionaire benefactor’s company says threatened its real estate profit margins, according to corporate documents reviewed by The Lever. 

Thomas did not disclose his relationship with real estate billionaire Harlan Crow, nor did he recuse himself from the 2021 case, despite its potential impact on Crow Holdings. 

 Now, rent control — which Crow Holdings’ documents also say threatens the company’s business — could come before Thomas, and there is no indication he would recuse himself if it does."

Imagine the outrage from Trumpublicans if it were Ketanji Jackson Brown being showered with expensive trips, financial gifts,  and luxurious vacations by a multi-billionaire who had business coming before the SCOTUS, and she did not recuse herself.

You would hear howling night and day. And yet, with this new information revealing Thomas's conflict of interest, not to mention the stink of influence peddling, we hear only crickets.

These scandals around Justice Thomas aren't going away.


Craig said...

Imagine the outrage from Trumpublicans if it were Ketanji Jackson Brown being showered with expensive trips, financial gifts, and luxurious vacations by a multi-billionaire who had business coming before the SCOTUS, and she did not recuse herself.

Now imagine that multi-billionaire was a Hungarian Jew (you know who). Yikes!

Accepting unreported lavish vacations and gifts from a real estate mogul with a Nazi/ tyrant fetish who stands to profit from his decisions. Meh.

Les Carpenter said...

Conservatism = Rampant Scandals w/ Little To No Acountability

And conservatives worried about President Obama who had A scandal free administration for 8 years.

While supporting whole heartedly a corrupt scandal ridden Trump administration. Also accepted an insurrection attempt by a corrupt republican president like it's no big deal. And is supoorting him again in his 2024 bid for another term.

The entire republican party hierarchy is corrupt and untrustworthy.

Grey One talks sass said...

It's not only Justice Thomas and his inability to navigate a financial disclosure form. There are several other justices who've "forgotten" to disclose salaries, gifts....

The folks I follow (lawyers mostly) are having kittens about this issue, focusing on Justice Robert's refusal to meet with the congressional committee charged with addressing the ethics violations... or the need for ethics. To a layperson it's rather confusing to me.

Suffice it to say that if any of the "liberals" on the court had tried one fifth of what Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh have already gotten away with the riots in the streets would have been epic.

Oh, just in case skud starts their "just asking questions" as to what Kavanaugh did here are my return questions: Who paid Kavanaugh's mortgage? Who paid their country club fees? Who paid their credit card balance? Kavanaugh didn't have the funds so who did it? These are questions that should have been asked during the vetting process but were not, so why?

SCOTUS used to be without reproach. Now? The majority of justices are either sold or up for sale while those who remain above reproach remain silent. Shouldn't they be furious enough to do something? I know I'd be working like a duck (calm on the surface, paddling like hell below) to ensure I held to my oath to defend the USA Constitution. But that's me.

Dave Miller said...

Shaw... there will be no defense of Thomas from a single conservative. Because like our gun laws, they would have to leave their tribe to even publicly imagine a solution.

But as it relates to this, let's compare and contrast Fmr Justice Marshall and his wife Cecilia and Justice Thomas and his wife Ginny. Thomas most should remember, replaced Marshall on the SCOTUS.

Relying on the principle of "avoiding the appearance of evil" or of being compromised, the Cecilia lived outside of DC, did not socialize in the city and avoided lavish parties. Because she believed she had a responsibility to not besmirch her husband's reputation, or potentially compromise his position or judicial rulings.

The Marshall's were in agreement in this belief that they should go above and beyond other to protect their position and the court.

And Justice Thomas and his wife? She's worked, unreported by her husband, for organizations with cases before the SCOTUS. Justice Thomas was found to have underreported her income numerous time, was cited, acknowledged his error, and then did it again!

They've closed real estate deals and then refused to report them, a breech not in custom, but in law. They've accepted trips and vacations worth millions, from rich friends with business before the court, and again, have not reported them.

Accept the trips, sell the home, whatever... just report it!

And now we have Senator Kennedy of Louisiana defending the couple calling the factual reporting of their actions a "high tech lynching". Wonderful.

It was a travesty when Thomas replaced Marshall on the court.

Now we are seeing why.

Shaw Kenawe said...

From Slate:

"...arguably no one stands to benefit from a clear set of standards more than the justices. When a public official is accused of misconduct, their best defense is always: “I followed the rules.” That response becomes unavailable when there are no rules, or when the rules require tasseography* [*Tasseography is a divination or fortune-telling method that interprets patterns in tea leaves, coffee grounds, or wine sediments] to understand. Nor is it possible to gauge just how far a justice stretched the rules when there is no baseline standard for comparison.

Every new story joins the ever-growing miasma of “the Supreme Court’s ethics scandal,” its import or ordinariness nearly impossible to gauge. Thomas mistakenly writing “Ltd.” instead of “LLC” on his forms, for instance, gets lumped in with his outrageous refusal to disclose millions of dollars’ worth of luxury trips from Harlan Crow. Progressive groups seize on each exposé with equal vigor, which is fair play when the code of conduct amounts to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Conservatives, on the other hand, play up the little stuff while ignoring the bigger violations so they can chalk it all up as another partisan nothingburger. There’s little sense of scale or proportion, and regular citizens can’t be expected to create their own taxonomy of rule-breaking."


Shaw Kenawe said...

Craig, Les, Grey One talks sass, Dave M.

The Slate article lays out quite effectively why a set of standards is needed.

Right now, there is a stench coming from the SCOTUS, and they've brought it on themselves for not wanting to be transparent and for appearing to be god-like jurists.

They're not. They're human beings with weaknesses just like the rest of us. And in this court it appears their love of luxury vacations, undisclosed income, and other questionable gifts is greater than their duty to avoid even a whiff of quid-pro-quo on the high court.

They've failed, and they've brought scandal, disgrace, and mistrust on themselves.

Mike said...

Ketanji Brown Jackson should have a friend come into the court with a bag of money and hand it to her.