Source: MANDEL NGAN / Getty
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas will not face a federal investigation into violations of judicial ethics he allegedly committed.
On Thursday (Jan. 2), the U.S. Judicial Conference announced that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas will not be subject to a federal investigation of allegations that he violated ethics with past behavior. In letters sent to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga), the judicial body relayed their decision, questioning if they had the authority to make such a probe.
“Justice Thomas has filed amended financial disclosure statements that address several issues identified in your letter,” Conrad wrote, continuing: “In addition, he has agreed to follow the relevant guidance issued to other federal judges, which would include the guidance mentioned above. We have no reason to believe he has done anything less. That provides one answer to your referral request.”
The requests to investigate came from Democrats in Congress who pointed to findings from a published investigative article last April by ProPublica that showed over two dozen instances of Thomas receiving luxury gifts and trips, mostly from the billionaire and Republican sponsor Harlan Crow. These include Crow purchasing Thomas’ mother’s home and a 2019 trip to Indonesia estimated to have cost $500,000. It has been estimated that since Thomas’ 1991 confirmation, he’s accepted $4.75 million worth of gifts. Thomas had argued that the guidelines at the time didn’t demand that he disclose those gifts. Conrad also cited that a request by Whitehouse and Johnson made to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland for a special counsel impacted the conference’s decision.
The situation has caused an uproar, with many more questioning the Court and its ability to rule and deliver opinions without bias. The judicial advocacy group, Fix The Court, decried the news in a statement: “The Conference’s letters further underscore the need for Congress to create a new and transparent mechanism to investigate the justices for ethics violations since the Conference is unwilling to act upon the one method we had presumed existed to do that.”
