Numerous good-government groups have called for new ethics rules for justices. Gorsuch did report that he made between $250,000 to $500,000 on the deal, but the section where a buyer could be listed was left blank. ► But then Politico reported that Justice Neil Gorsuch failed to disclose that he sold nearly $2 million in real estate to the head of a law firm that routinely argues cases in front of the court, which hasn’t helped things. Thomas blamed bad advice for not disclosing the travel gifts and is set to amend disclosures to retroactively note the real estate deal. But it does certainly raise questions about ethics and conflicts of interest at a time when public faith in the Supreme Court is sagging.

None of this is to suggest Thomas exerted any influence on Crow’s behalf. Thomas, notably, did not recuse himself from the matter. ► CNN later reported the court declined to hear an appeal in a case brought against a company tied to Crow, although it wasn’t clear at the time that Crow had anything to do with the case. ► Then, ProPublica reported that Crow bought real estate from Thomas, which Thomas also failed to disclose in 2014. ► First, the independent investigative journalism group ProPublica reported that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose luxury travel financed by his billionaire buddy Harlan Crow, a Republican donor. The list of problematic ethics developments goes like this: Independence and security, they argue, make the Supreme Court a special case.įar from satisfying anyone growing concerned about ethics at the court, the statement made it seem as though the justices feel the rules are optional for them.

A series of findings about Supreme Court justices failing to fully disclose gifts and real estate deals led to a rare moment of unity.Ĭonservative and liberal justices joined together to say in a statement that they’re quite happy with the current system by which they voluntarily follow ethics guidelines.

The storm crow series