Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' Undisclosed Private Jet Trips with Republican Megadonor: A Call for Transparency and Accountability

https://icaro.icaromediagroup.com/system/images/photos/16255008/original/open-uri20240613-18-e5r670?1718312755
ICARO Media Group
Politics
13/06/2024 20h58

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Took Undisclosed Trips on Republican Megadonor's Private Jet, Documents Show

In a recent release by the Senate Judiciary Committee, it has been revealed that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas took three undisclosed trips on a private jet provided by Republican megadonor Harlan Crow between 2017 and 2021. The records, which were obtained by the committee, show that Thomas traveled aboard Crow's private jet on multiple occasions.

The first trip took place in May 2017, with Thomas flying from St. Louis, Missouri, to Kalispell, Montana, and then returning to Dallas two days later. The second trip occurred in March 2019, where Thomas flew from Washington, D.C., to Savannah, Georgia, and back. The third trip was in June 2021 and involved roundtrip flights between Washington and San Jose, California.

The disclosure of these trips comes as Crow turned over documents to the Senate Judiciary Committee, following their authorization of a subpoena for information. However, conservative judicial activist Leonard Leo refused to comply with the committee's demands. Crow's office revealed that they had not received a subpoena from the committee.

It has been noted that Justice Thomas did not include the private jet travel in his most recent financial disclosure statement. This omission has raised concerns regarding transparency and compliance with ethical standards. The Supreme Court has not yet commented on the matter.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin reacted to the news, expressing his concerns about Justice Thomas' undisclosed trips and the need for an enforceable code of conduct for the Supreme Court. Durbin stated that the ongoing investigation into the court's ethical crisis is revealing new information, reinforcing the necessity of a code of conduct.

Crow's office released a statement, indicating that an agreement was reached to provide information going back seven years as requested by Democrats. As a result, the committee agreed to end its probe with respect to Crow.

In addition to the disclosed trips, Durbin announced that documents revealed further travel aboard Crow's private jet. This included a July 2019 trip to Bali, Indonesia, along with an eight-day "yacht excursion" and a trip to Santa Rosa, California. Thomas had made an amendment to his 2019 financial disclosure form, including these trips, but he did not initially report them.

The Judiciary Committee has been investigating ethics issues at the Supreme Court for approximately a year, prompted by reporting from ProPublica. The news outlet revealed Thomas' trips with Crow, including the Bali vacation, which had not been disclosed on his financial reports.

Justice Thomas previously stated that he believed he was not required to disclose these trips but pledged to comply with the guidelines issued by the Judicial Conference. His 2022 financial disclosure report did include flights taken on Crow's private plane and lodging at Crow's property in the Adirondacks. Additionally, details about a 2014 real estate transaction with Crow were provided.

Thomas' relationship with Crow has led Senate Democrats to push for a formal code of conduct for the Supreme Court. However, the legislation has not yet been voted upon, and a recent attempt to pass the ethics bill was blocked by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.

While the Supreme Court did unveil its own code of conduct, it lacks means of enforcement, leading to criticism from Democrats who find the ethics rules insufficient.

The revelations of Justice Thomas' undisclosed trips on a private jet provided by a Republican megadonor raise questions about transparency and accountability within the Supreme Court. As the investigation continues, the call for a comprehensive and enforceable code of conduct for the highest court grows louder.

The views expressed in this article do not reflect the opinion of ICARO, or any of its affiliates.

Related