US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been accused of breaking the law by failing to disclose gifts and trips funded by billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow. Thomas and his wife, Virginia Ginni Thomas, reportedly accepted lavish vacations, including trips on Crow's private jet and yacht, and stays at his luxury resort. These allegations have sparked debates about ethical standards and raised questions about potential violations of federal ethics laws and the Ethics in Government Act. Legal scholars disagree on whether Thomas broke the law, and there have been calls for investigations and impeachment proceedings. The controversy surrounding Thomas's actions highlights the complex nature of judicial ethics and the public's expectations of Supreme Court justices.
Characteristics | Values |
---|---|
Date of the alleged law-breaking | Between 1992 and 2023 |
Nature of the alleged law-breaking | Accepting lavish gifts, loans, and vacations from billionaire buddies, including Harlan Crow, without disclosing them |
Alleged law(s) broken | 28 U.S. Code § 455, Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 5 U.S. Code § 7353 |
Status of the case | A judicial policymaking body rejected a request to refer Clarence Thomas to the Department of Justice |
What You'll Learn
Did Clarence Thomas violate the Ethics in Government Act of 1978?
There are conflicting opinions on whether Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas violated the Ethics in Government Act of 1978.
Some sources claim that Thomas's failure to disclose the luxury trips and gifts he received from billionaire GOP donor and real estate developer Harlan Crow violated the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. According to the Act, judges, including Supreme Court justices, are required to detail gifts above a few hundred dollars. However, the Act exempts "personal hospitality," including meals and accommodations provided by friends.
Thomas argued that he was advised that he did not need to report such hospitality from close personal friends, and that they did not have business before the Court. He has since amended his disclosures to reflect some travel and agreed to comply with updated disclosure requirements.
On the other hand, critics argue that Thomas's failure to disclose the trips and gifts, which included private jets, yacht trips, tuition payments, and real estate transactions, violated the Act. They point out that the Act requires judges to disclose gifts and that Thomas's amended disclosures still omitted some instances of luxury travel and gifts. Additionally, Thomas's wife, Ginni Thomas, has been involved with groups that have submitted briefs to the Supreme Court, creating a potential conflict of interest.
In January 2025, the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary's top policymaking body, decided not to refer Thomas to the Department of Justice for investigation. Robert Conrad, a US district judge and head of the judiciary's administrative arm, cited Thomas's amended financial disclosure reports and the lack of clear authority to make such a referral as reasons for the decision.
The controversy surrounding Thomas has sparked calls for reforms and a binding code of ethics for the Supreme Court, as the current measures and the Court's self-enforcing 2023 ethics code are seen as insufficient to ensure transparency and accountability.
Canadian Truckers: Lawbreakers or Freedom Fighters?
You may want to see also
Did he break the law by not disclosing gifts?
There is some debate as to whether Clarence Thomas broke the law by not disclosing gifts.
Thomas received gifts from billionaire GOP donor Harlan Crow, including luxury trips around the world, travel on private jets and yachts, and stays at exclusive resorts. Thomas did not disclose these gifts, claiming that he was advised that he did not have to report them as they fell under "personal hospitality".
The Ethics in Government Act requires all covered officials, including Supreme Court justices, to disclose gifts on "OGE [Office of Government Ethics] forms". Specifically, covered officials must report gifts worth more than $250 received from any source other than a relative, with some exceptions for "personal hospitality".
The law is less clear when it comes to transportation, such as private jet travel, but a panel that sets policy for the federal judiciary has clarified that judges should disclose these types of gifts.
Some legal experts argue that Thomas violated the law by not disclosing the gifts on his annual financial disclosures. They claim that the gifts go beyond what would typically be considered "personal hospitality" and that Thomas should have erred on the side of disclosure.
However, others argue that the law is ambiguous and that Thomas was following the advice he received at the time. The Supreme Court is not formally bound by any code of conduct, and justices largely sit above federal ethics regulations.
The controversy surrounding Thomas's failure to disclose gifts has prompted calls for new ethics rules and an investigation into his conduct.
Seeking Asylum: Lawbreakers or Misunderstood?
You may want to see also
Did Thomas violate 28 U.S. Code § 455?
According to legal scholar Laurence Tribe, US Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas may have violated 28 U.S. Code § 455 by refusing to recuse himself from the Moore v. Harper case. The statute deals with federal judges disqualifying themselves from cases where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
Tribe argued that Thomas was in violation of "two provisions that almost any lawyer would say require Clarence Thomas not to participate at all". Firstly, he cited a section stating that a justice may not participate if someone could reasonably question their impartiality. Secondly, he referenced a section that says a justice should not be involved if their spouse has an interest in the case. Thomas's wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, is a conservative activist who was an active participant in attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, which formed the basis of the Moore v. Harper case.
However, the statute on recusal is difficult to enforce, and it is unclear whether any action will be taken. The Supreme Court is not formally bound by any code of conduct, and there is ambiguity and disagreement among judicial ethics experts regarding the interpretation of the federal statute governing gifts to judges.
Argosy's Legal Troubles: Did They Break the Law?
You may want to see also
Did he refuse to recuse himself from a Supreme Court case?
In December 2022, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas was accused of potentially breaking the law by refusing to recuse himself from the Moore v. Harper case. The case in question was a controversial one about the power to draw and strike down electoral maps.
Legal scholar Laurence Tribe told MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell that Thomas may have violated 28 U.S.C. § 455, a statute that deals with federal judges disqualifying themselves from cases. Tribe argued that Thomas was in violation of the law because of "two provisions that almost any lawyer would say require Clarence Thomas not to participate at all."
The first provision states that a justice may not participate if someone could reasonably question their impartiality. Tribe argued that this provision applied to Thomas because his wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, had an interest in the case. Ginni Thomas is a conservative activist who encouraged former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to continue efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Moore v. Harper involved North Carolina Republicans asking the Supreme Court whether state courts could throw out electoral maps and order districts to be redrawn, which was relevant to Ginni Thomas's interest in overturning the 2020 election results.
The second provision cited by Tribe states that a justice shouldn't be involved if their spouse has an interest in the case. This provision also seems to apply to Thomas, given his wife's aforementioned interest and involvement in the events surrounding the case.
Despite these arguments, Tribe acknowledged that the statute on recusal was challenging to enforce, and he doubted the Department of Justice would take any action. The outcome of the case could have had a significant impact on U.S. elections, and Thomas's participation, despite his potential conflict of interest, raised concerns about the Supreme Court's ethics standards.
In addition to the controversy surrounding his refusal to recuse himself from the Moore v. Harper case, Thomas has also faced scrutiny for failing to disclose luxury trips and gifts provided by a wealthy benefactor, Texas businessman and Republican donor Harlan Crow. In January 2025, a judicial policymaking body rejected a request by Democratic lawmakers to refer Thomas to the Department of Justice to examine these claims. Thomas has since amended his financial disclosure reports and agreed to follow updated requirements on reporting trips and gifts.
Arpaio's Actions: Federal Law Violation?
You may want to see also
Did Thomas' actions constitute a violation of conflict of interest laws?
There is debate over whether Clarence Thomas violated conflict of interest laws.
Thomas has been accused of breaking the law by accepting undisclosed trips and gifts from billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow. These include trips on Crow's private jet and yacht, and vacations at his luxurious New York resort. Thomas's wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, also joined him on some of these trips. The total value of these gifts is estimated to be over $4.75 million.
Thomas did disclose a 2015 gift from Crow—a bronze bust of abolitionist Frederick Douglass valued at $6,484. However, he did not mention the vacations and other travel on Crow's plane and yacht in his annual financial disclosure reports.
The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires justices of the Supreme Court to file annual financial public disclosure reports, detailing "sources, amounts of income, gifts, and reimbursements." There is an exception for "personal hospitality," which includes meals and accommodations at the homes of friends. However, the law is less clear when it comes to transportation, such as private jet travel. A panel that sets policy for the federal judiciary recently clarified that judges should disclose these types of gifts.
Some legal experts argue that Thomas violated a federal law that requires judges, including Supreme Court justices, to detail gifts above a few hundred dollars. They claim that Thomas's failure to disclose the trips and the true extent of the gifts he received constitutes a violation of conflict of interest laws.
However, others argue that the law is ambiguous and open to interpretation. Before the recent amendments to the gift reporting rules, there was a reporting exemption for "personal hospitality." Thomas has claimed that because the invitation came from a person and not a corporation, it did not need to be reported, regardless of the value.
The Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary's top policymaking body, declined to refer Thomas to the Department of Justice for investigation. They cited Thomas's amended disclosure forms, which addressed several issues, and made a jurisdictional claim that they did not have the authority to take any action.
The debate highlights the lack of a clear and enforceable code of conduct for the Supreme Court, which is not formally bound by any code of conduct, unlike lower court judges.
Lincoln's Law-Breaking: A Historical Inquiry
You may want to see also