Lawyers with cases before the Court funded Clarence Thomas' xmas parties
The formerly public Venmo account of Rajan
Vasisht, who served as Thomas' aide from July 2019 to July 2021, shows that
"he received seven payments in November and December 2019 from lawyers who
previously served as Thomas legal clerks," The Guardian reported Wednesday.
"The amount of the payments is not disclosed, but the purpose of each payment is listed as either 'Christmas party,' 'Thomas Christmas Party,' 'CT Christmas Party,'
or 'CT Xmas party,' in an apparent reference to the justice's initials."
While it's not clear what precisely the
funds were for, the Venmo transactions draw further attention to the close ties
between Thomas and certain individuals who have had cases in front of the
justice. For critics, they provide fresh evidence of the ethical rot at the
nation's top judicial body.
"Corruption," tweeted the
Progressive Change Campaign Committee. "Lawyers with business in front of
the Supreme Court helping finance Clarence Thomas' Christmas parties? This
court loses more and more of its legitimacy every day."
Richard Painter, the chief White House
ethics lawyer during former President George W. Bush's administration,
told The Guardian that "it is 'not appropriate' for
former Thomas law clerks who were established in private practice to—in
effect—send money to the Supreme Court via Venmo."
"There is no excuse for it. Thomas could invite them to his Christmas party and he could attend Christmas parties, as long as they are not discussing any cases. His Christmas party should not be paid for by lawyers," Painter said. "A federal government employee collecting money from lawyers for any reason... I don't see how that works."
— (@)
According to The Guardian:
The lawyers who made the Venmo transactions
were: Patrick Strawbridge, a
partner at Consovoy McCarthy who recently successfully argued that
affirmative action violated the U.S. Constitution; Kate Todd, who served as
White House deputy counsel under Donald Trump at the time of the payment and is
now a managing party of Ellis George Cipollone's law office; Elbert Lin, the
former solicitor general of West Virginia who played a key role in a Supreme
Court case that limited the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to
regulate greenhouse gas emissions; and Brian Schmalzbach, a partner at McGuire
Woods who has argued multiple cases before the Supreme Court.
Other lawyers who made payments include Manuel Valle, a graduate of Hillsdale
College and the University of Chicago Law School who clerked for Thomas last
year and is currently working as a managing associate at Sidley, and Liam
Hardy, who was working at the Department of Justice's office of legal counsel
at the time the payment was made and now serves as an appeals court judge for
the armed forces.
Will Consovoy, who died earlier this year,
also made a payment. Consovoy clerked for Thomas during the 2008-09 term and
was considered a rising star in conservative legal circles. After his
death, The New York Times reported that Consovoy had come away
from his time working for Thomas "with the conviction that the court was
poised to tilt further to the right—and that constitutional rulings that had
once been considered out of reach by conservatives, on issues like voting
rights, abortion, and affirmative action, would suddenly be within grasp."
Previous reporting by ProPublica has
revealed how billionaire real estate tycoon and Republican megadonor Harlan
Crow has lavished Thomas with hundreds of thousands of dollars
in gifts over the past 25 years—including paying for luxury vacations,
Thomas' mother's home, and
Thomas' grandnephew's private school
tuition.
Crow has relationships with
several right-wing groups involved in Supreme Court cases since Thomas was
first confirmed to the bench in 1991. In addition, his own real estate company,
Crow Holdings, was directly implicated in a 2021 case before the court.
As The Lever reported earlier
this year, Thomas voted to end the Covid-era federal eviction moratorium after
Crow Holdings described the lifesaving policy as
a threat to its "profit margins."
Americans for Tax Fairness has shown that after Thomas provided a deciding vote in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case, the Crow family's average annual campaign contributions ballooned by 862%, from $163,241 before 2010 to $1.57 million since.
Furthermore, according to Citizens for Responsibility
and Ethics in Washington, Crow "personally took park in the creation"
of the dark money system that blossomed in the wake of that 5-4 ruling.
On Sunday, a New York Times article
about Thomas' membership in the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished
Americans exposed how the
justice has "received benefits—many of them previously unreported—from a
broader cohort of wealthy and powerful friends" than was previously known.
Thomas' failure to disclose handouts from
multiple benefactors in violation of federal ethics rules has raised questions
about his judicial independence and prompted demands for
his resignation or
impeachment. Notably, he is far from alone when it comes to conflicts of
interest on the Supreme Court.
Politico reported earlier
this year that just days after his April 2017 confirmation, Justice
Neil Gorsuch and his business partners sold a 40-acre Colorado ranch for almost
$2 million to an individual whose name was not initially disclosed. The buyer,
Brian Duffy, is the CEO of a law firm that has since been involved in 22 cases
before the court.
Last month, ProPublicarevealed that
Justice Samuel Alito took an undisclosed private jet flight to Alaska in 2008
with Paul Singer, a billionaire hedge fund manager with direct links to cases
that reached the court in subsequent years. Singer also has financial connections to
right-wing groups opposed to President Joe Biden's student
debt relief plan, which was overturned last
month with the help of Alito, Gorsuch, and Thomas.
Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)
and Dick Durbin (Ill.) announced Monday
that the Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on the pair's Supreme
Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act next Thursday. The legislation
seeks to establish a code of conduct for the high court, fortify financial
disclosure rules, and strengthen recusal requirements for justices.
In addition to imposing robust ethics
rules, progressives have called for other
changes to disempower the country's "rogue" justices, including
adding seats—a move that has been made seven times throughout
U.S. history.
Despite the historical precedent and the
recent spate of devastating decisions handed down by the Supreme Court's
reactionary majority, Biden recently dismissed the idea
of court expansion, arguing that it would "politicize" the nation's
top judicial body.