Sunday, September 24, 2023

Clarence Thomas spent time at the Koch Brothers' version of Coachella. Something tells us they weren't making each other flower crowns.

Hannah Getahun
Sun, September 24, 2023 at 6:39 AM MDT·3 min read

nullAlex Wong/Getty Images // Scott Roth/Invision/AP

A new ProPublica report uncovered another undisclosed trip made by SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas.


This trip was for a fundraising event hosted by the Koch brothers' network of nonprofits.


Thomas was also criticized for attending the fundraiser over a decade ago.

Do you think Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas listens to Beyoncé?

Maybe? Either way, in 2018, the controversial judge flew into California's Coachella Valley for one of the snazziest events of the year. Unlike other influencers who make their way to Coachella, however, Thomas didn't post about it on Instagram — or his financial disclosure forms.

Of course, the event Thomas went to had nothing to do with the beloved music festival. Still, a new investigation from ProPublica uncovered his recent participation in a fundraiser hosted by the Koch brothers in the same desert valley in Southern California. (Oddly enough, the actual Coachella also has Koch connections.)

Per the publication, a network of nonprofits handled by Charles Koch, an influential conservative, hosts its largest fundraiser in the Coachella Valley every winter. There, hundreds of donors fly in with cash in hand for a jam-packed weekend with their pals.

Whether or not there was alternative music or alternative facts, guests schmoozed with some of the most powerful conservatives in the country: The lineup featured right-wing groups, including Americans For Prosperity and NFL star turned college football coach Deion Sanders.

Aside from being incredibly exclusive, the Koch Network's principal event is also extremely private, per ProPublica: Organizers rent out entire hotels and meticulously shred any documents on-site. News outlets at the time also reported that everyone had to lock their cell phones in pouches to prevent people from recording.

In 2018 — just like Queen Bey a few miles away — Thomas was one of the headliners at the event, this one at the Renaissance Esmeralda Resort and Spa in Indian Wells.

A high-level staffer with the Koch brothers' nonprofit network told ProPublica that Thomas attended dinners with the wealthiest donors and even gave guests a look into his judicial philosophy. Thomas' appearances were coordinated by Leonard Leo — the influential conservative who happens to be a pretty big fan of the Justice.

Thomas did not list the trip on his 2018 financial disclosure — a recurring theme for the Justice — and a former federal judge who spoke to ProPublica said his attendance, while not illegal, does raise questions about his conflicts of interest when handling Supreme Court cases with ties to the brothers.

This isn't even the first time Thomas has faced scrutiny for attending the event and not disclosing it. In 2010, reporters uncovered Thomas' attendance at 2008's GOP-chella. A spokesperson at the time said that he didn't participate and only made a "brief drop-by." The spokesperson did not elaborate on whether that meant he waved hello or spit a guest verse.

Representatives for Thomas did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Insider.


Clarence Thomas’ Koch Party Is Latest Shocking Ethics Breach

Shan Wu
Sat, September 23, 2023 


Alex Wong


Justice Clarence Thomas once championed the Supreme Court line of precedent giving deference to federal agency expertise—the so-called “Chevron deference” doctrine—writing in 2005 that the Federal Telecommunications Commission was “in a far better position to address these questions than we are” in a case involving regulation of broadband internet service given that the “subject matter [that] is technical, complex, and dynamic.”

Thomas’ decision in that case—one known as Brand X—was no outlier given that the Chevron case from which the precedent arose has been cited more than 15,000 times since being decided by the high court in 1984. But 15 years later, Thomas announced that his own decision in that case was wrong because it added to the “constitutional deficiencies of Chevron and exacerbates them.” Unusually, Thomas announced his change of heart in a dissent where he advocated that SCOTUS should have accepted a case for the purpose of overruling his own opinion.

What changed?

One possible influence on the justice’s heart and mind is his previously secret history of involvement with the conservative political organization—known as the Koch network—founded by the libertarian billionaires Charles and David Koch. The Koch network has been a prime mover in the effort to whittle back and overturn the Chevron case as part of a conservative agenda to cut back on what they perceive as government overreach.

Congress Needs to Show Samuel Alito and the Supreme Court Who’s Boss

Recent reporting by ProPublica, reveals that Thomas has attended at least two donor events for the Koch network, such as the one in 2018 in which he was flown in on a private Gulfstream G2000 jet to Palm Springs, California and was a featured speaker, attending a private dinner with network donors.

“To be invited to events like the annual summit, donors typically have to give at least $100,000 a year. Those who give in the millions receive special treatment, including dinners with Charles Koch and high-profile guests. Doling out access to powerful public officials was seen as a potent fundraising strategy,” former staffers told the publication.

Thomas never reported the 2018 trip on his annual financial disclosure form. That’s the same annual financial disclosure form that for the year 2022 Thomas received an extension to file months later than other justices—as did Justice Alito—and used to justify his failure to disclose luxury trips and real estate purchases paid for by conservative billionaire Harlan Crow.

The real estate purchase dated back to 2014 but Thomas did not explain it until now and only after a string of exposes about his being the beneficiary of luxury trips, financing a luxury RV as well as the real estate purchase of a home in which Thomas’ mother lives.

Thomas’ attendance at the Koch network meeting is significant because of the Koch network’s extraordinary presence in advocacy work, including cases before the Supreme Court. “The Koch network is among the largest and most influential political organizations of the last half century, and it’s underwritten a far-reaching campaign to influence the course of American law,” ProPublica reports.

For example, the Koch network—recently rebranded as “Stand Together”—through it’s lawyers are now poised to have the Supreme Court achieve the goal of reversing the Chevron case because the high court has now accepted a case to hear next term with the specific purpose of considering whether to overrule the Chevron doctrine.

Thomas’ attendance at these donor events “puts Thomas in the extraordinary position of having served as a fundraising draw for a network that has brought cases before the Supreme Court, including one of the most closely watched of the upcoming term.”

Any federal judge who concealed such a trip would likely be considered to be in violation of their reporting requirements as well as the judicial code of conduct. “I can’t imagine—it takes my breath away, frankly—that he would go to a Koch network event for donors,” said John E. Jones III, a retired federal judge appointed by President George W. Bush. Jones said that if he had gone to a Koch summit as a district court judge. “I’d have gotten a letter that would’ve commenced a disciplinary proceeding.”

That is, any federal judge except one that sits on the U.S. Supreme Court. Unlike all other judges—federal and state—Supreme Court judges are not subject to any ethics code and steadfastly refuse to adopt one despite growing public criticism and the American Bar Association’s call for SCOTUS to adopt an ethics code.

The decades-long litigation agenda pursued by the Koch network and other conservative groups is enormously well-funded and plays a very successful long game. The overturning of Roe v. Wade is but one example of its successes. If the Chevron doctrine is thrown out, then much of the true authority over federal regulations will default to the judiciary and therefore to SCOTUS. Decisions about climate change, for example, would be greatly complicated if the Environmental Protection Agency efforts to curtail carbon emissions are derailed through judicial decisions.

In a less high-profile light is the case that puts Chevron on the chopping block—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo—which involves the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service to make commercial fishing companies pay for the costs of monitoring compliance with fishery management plans.

While opinions can reasonably differ on the wisdom of agency decisions as well as judicial decisions, opinion should not differ on the view that there is something wrong with allowing justices who benefit financially from groups arguing the cases before them deciding those cases.

Why All 9 Supreme Court Justices United to Avoid Accountability

It’s not that Thomas—or any other justice—can’t associate with whomever they wish but when the justices are gifted hundreds of thousands of dollars it has to be disclosed as do appearances at fundraising events which other federal judges would be disciplined for attending.

The code of conduct for the federal judiciary lays out rules designed to preserve judges’ impartiality and independence, which it calls “indispensable to justice in our society.” The code specifically prohibits both political activity and participation in fundraising. Judges are advised, for instance, not to “associate themselves” with any group “publicly identified with controversial legal, social, or political positions.”

Nor is the problem with any group—conservative or liberal—engaging in decades-long strategies for changing the law through litigation. That kind of advocacy—for better or worse—is part of our system of civil justice. No, the problem is when these changes in law are not achieved through advocacy but rather through seeking to influence judges who sit on the nation’s highest court through financial benefits involving gifts and trips.

Thomas should be forced to recuse himself from hearing cases brought by groups that he helps fundraise for and who fly him on private jets. He may even need to be investigated by Congress or the Justice Department for his failure to make timely and full disclosures. But none of that can happen so long as there is no transparency about who Thomas helps and who helps him. It all starts with transparency.

'Code of conduct:' Elena Kagan calls for new Supreme Court rules amid Clarence Thomas flap

David Jackson, USA TODAY
Sat, September 23, 2023 

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas


WASHINGTON - Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan says she hopes colleagues will adopt an ethics "code of conduct," while a new report details a relationship between Justice Clarence Thomas and conservative political activists.

New ethics rules would "go far in persuading other people that we were adhering to the highest standards of conduct," Kagan said during a Friday speech at Notre Dame Law School. "I hope we can make progress.”

Kagan did not mention Thomas or any other justice by name.

Her suggestion came the same day that ProPublica published another installment in a string of stories about Thomas and wealthy donors who have the potential of business before the court. The latest story concerns the Koch Brothers, philanthropists who have spent millions on behalf of various conservative causes.

ProPublica reported that "Thomas has attended Koch donor events at least twice over the years," and "that puts Thomas in the extraordinary position of having served as a fundraising draw for a network that has brought cases before the Supreme Court, including one of the most closely watched of the upcoming term."

The report noted that the Koch political network has an interest in a pending Supreme Court case seeking to limit "federal agencies’ power to issue regulations in areas ranging from the environment to labor rights to consumer protection."

Members of Congress have discussed legislation setting ethics standards for the Supreme Court, though it is uncertain whether they have the legal authority to regulate what is a separate branch of government.

Kagan's remarks strike a similar tone to those made a few weeks ago by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who signaled that the Supreme Court may take steps "soon" to address ethics scandals that have eroded confidence and sparked a partisan fight in Congress over whether lawmakers can force a code of ethics on the nation's highest court. Chief Justice John Roberts told an audience in May that the ethics scandals swirling around the court were an "issue of concern" and that the justices were "continuing to look at things" to address the problem.

Related: Brett Kavanaugh says he's hopeful the Supreme Court will take 'concrete steps' to address ethics scandals

Stand Together, the formal name of the Koch political network, said in a statement that Thomas did not participate in fundraising discussions and their events have a public service purpose.

"Our summits provide a forum for people to learn about how they can partner with one another to solve big problems in our country," the statement said.

It added: "The idea that attending a couple events to promote a book or give dinner remarks, as all the justices do, could somehow be undue influence just doesn’t hold water."

Dig deeper Case closed? Supreme Court silent after Thomas luxury travel raised ethics scandal

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Elena Kagan calls for new Supreme Court code amid Clarence Thomas flap

No comments:

Post a Comment