Happy Flag Day, Mrs. Alito!
Tag: Sam Alito ethics
Justice Clarence Thomas’s Mea Culpa, Without Much Mea
During August 2023 I wrote of ProPublica’s investigation of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s creative moral and legal accounting on his yearly financial statements. His failure to disclose two all-expense paid trips during 2019 to Indonesia and to the Bohemian Grove, an all-male retreat in northern California, were each financed entirely by billionaire Harlan Crow, a cofounder of Club for Growth and a major donor to the GOP. Well, today the self-fashioned untouchable, unshakeable Supreme Court justice filed a financial disclosure document that (quite belatedly) described a come to Jesus change of attitude, if only for a moment.
This is quite a turnaround. Recall that at the time of ProPublica’s April 2023 exposé, Thomas characterized his trips – as did benefactor Crow – as “hospitality” which he maintained was not reportable on his 2019 financial disclosure report. I fact, he took high road that only lifetime tenure in one’s government job offers by maintaining that all of this was just Mr. Crow’s hospitable way of spending some of his billions. And apparently Justice Thomas was also hospitable enough to accept free hospitality. And, despite the many many thousand dollars spent by Crow, Thomas maintained that hospitality doesn’t count as income or as a gift, noe would it sully his judicial neutrality should a case come forth impacting Harlan Crow or his buddies. And, what are you going to do about it, he seemed to say, “impeach me?” Well, actually, some suggested it.
This has caused Thomas many headaches for the past two years. He wasn’t helped to escape the spotlight by his hospitable brethren Justice Sam Alito (who also got ensnared in the hospitality trap, see here). Moreover, lately, the upside down American flag catastrophe didn’t exactly cover Alito in a garland of roses. The public doesn’t seem to care for juvenile delinquents sitting on the highest court. Moreover, Rhode Island’s Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has been incessantly irritating the Court to produce an enforceable code of ethics, finding no joy there. So, it’s possible that Thomas thought that disclosing, four years late, his 2019 antics now would lighten his load a bit despite how miffed he must be at having to carry a load at all. Regardless, whether what amounts to a confession of wrongdoing will actually lighten his load, his belated report is directly below (emphasis added).
Let’s see how this is received by us, the public. The fact that Thomas pleads “inadvertently” to his failure to file in 2019 – after having had a world class team of lawyers advising him – wouldn’t be accepted as a plea for mercy by a judge, for example, like Sam “Hang ’em High” Alito, arguably, Thomas’s Old Gangster crony. So, from a PR standpoint, it would have been helpful have issued a press release explaining that he “regrets” something, anything related to what I’d guess he still believes to be a small faux pas.
Perhaps, like Alito vis-a-vis the upside flag episode, he could simply blame his wife . . . Yes, Clarence, let’s try blaming Ginni.
The Openly Hospitable Sam Alito, Supreme Court Justice
In 2008 Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito accepted a last minute invite for a fishing trip to Alaska offered by billionaire hedge fund maven and major GOP donor Paul Singer. It included, gratis, transportation on Singer’s private jet, lodging, meals, and, perhaps, rod, reel, and bait. In the end, he got caught by his own bait. ProPublica discovered that Alito failed to report any of this as a gift that, of course, might just tempt him to smile upon any cases brought before the court that involve Singer’s interests. In effect, Paul Singer landed a 200 pound Supreme Court justice for a price estimated a $100,000; the only surprise here is that he wasn’t able to squeeze in Clarence and Ginny Thomas.
Alito, in a rush to overshadow ProPublica, wrote, for the Wall Street Journal, what amounted to a whining legal and ethical defense almost before the ProPublica story broke. Alito made the usual excuses: I don’t have to report what was nothing other than hospitality; the trip wasn’t really all that luxurious, it was “rustic,” at best and served only “family-style meals,” and wine under the cost of $1,000 per bottle; and, in short, you can all go to hell.
This journal caught up with Alito at the Disgruntled Toad, a new restaurant within the Capitol rotunda. He’d agreed to sit down for lunch with us (and on us) if we’d agree in writing that our offer was simple hospitality and thus unreportable. Our reporter, Bart Shultz, of course agreed, and Alito ordered a steak the size of a small Alaska town; items to take home, including tee shirts; and a bottle of $999 wine, none of which this journal could afford, but we figured we’re judgment proof. Thereby the interview began.
Alito: “Let me start this interview off the record by asking why the hell do you care what I did with some fishing buddies 16 years ago?” [Note: We don’t do “off the record.”]
Shultz: “Well it’s a matter of great concern to our country and there’s no bigger story than you right now. Also, it’s a story worth a thousand dollar lunch, if you get my meaning.”
Alito: “Yeah, I get it you, you obnoxious enemy of the people; no interview, no hospitality.”
Shultz: “Would you do the same thing today if Singer offered you a fishing trip to Alaska?”
Alito: “Wow. You dive right in, don’t you? Of course I would accept, in a New York minute. He’s a very hospitable man. I’m a very hospitable man. Also, I don’t have to report gifts that are hospitable. One reason is, I didn’t catch any sunfish in 2008, the water was too cold. But now that some say the sea is warming I’d like to catch a bunch of sunfish. Good eating, great sushi, and I can sell sunfish in Japan where it’s a delicacy.”
Shultz: “Many legal scholars, though, assert that your Alaska trip was not hospitality; it was pure and simple a reportable gift. Also, they assert that you ought to have recused yourself from any cases that implicated any of Paul Singer’s interests.”
Alito: “No, no, no. Over the years I’ve accepted a lot of hospitality from a bevy of persons wealthy enough to offer a Supreme Court Justice such hospitality. I would not accept hospitality from persons who were of modest means. Perhaps I’d be hospitable enough to give them an autograph. Would you call that a reportable gift? Should they report my autograph to the IRS as income?”
Shultz: “Sir, so you admit that you regularly accept what you broadly define as hospitality? And you maintain that you do not have to recuse yourself from cases that involve those hospitable persons?”
Alito: “Now you’re catching on. If I had to recuse, why, I’d have to recuse myself from a preponderance of cases now before the court! There would be no reason for me to sit on the court.”
Shultz: “Many are saying that right now; some calling for your impeachment. What about that? Moreover, what about the obvious ethical improprieties of your actions?”
Alito: “Law is something, young man, that you are required to do or not to do. Ethics is not law, just a suggestion that taking what might be bribes in some circumstances might be appropriate for certain persons. Ethics is enforced by self policing. Look at Sotomayor. She was gifted numerous times with large amounts, by weight, of bagels. Not those supermarket bagels, but the substantially heavier boutique bagels infused with caviar and truffles and gold which are highly prized by many, including federal employees who do not have the wherewithal monetarily to purchase them from toney bagel shops.”
Shultz: “Justice Sotomayor refused the bagels!”
Alito: “So she indicated, however, how does one refuse lox and bagels? I’m skeptical. As for me, my mouth is watering.”
Shultz: “Well, sir, I believe you misread the temper of the times. Ethics, for whatever reasons, is having its day. Senator Dick Durbin of the Judiciary Committee said the other day, ‘We wouldn’t tolerate this from a city council member or an alderman.'”
Alito: “Dick Durbin is subject to a vote in 2026. On the other hand, I am a member of the life tenured profession. Good luck impeaching me. I can count votes, and I’m not seeing that as a viable option. So, until that changes I’m open for hospitality.”