EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- The Judicial Lynching of Bradley Manning
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
Popular content
Today's Top News
Common Cause Questions Justice Thomas' Koch Connection
WASHINGTON — Discrepancies in reports about an appearance by Justice Clarence Thomas at a political retreat for wealthy conservatives three years ago have prompted new questions to the Supreme Court from a group that advocates changing campaign finance laws.
Discrepancies in reports about an appearance by Justice Clarence Thomas at a political retreat for wealthy conservatives three years ago have prompted new questions to the Supreme Court from a group that advocates changing campaign finance laws. When questions were first raised about the retreat last month, a court spokeswoman said Justice Thomas had made a “brief drop-by” at the event in Palm Springs, Calif., in January 2008 and had given a talk.
In his financial disclosure report for that year, however, Justice Thomas reported that the Federalist Society, a prominent conservative legal group, had reimbursed him an undisclosed amount for four days of “transportation, meals and accommodations” over the weekend of the retreat. The event is organized by Charles and David Koch, brothers who have used millions of dollars from the energy conglomerate they run in Wichita, Kan., to finance conservative causes.
Arn Pearson, a vice president at the advocacy group Common Cause, said the two statements appeared at odds. His group sent a letter to the Supreme Court on Monday asking for “further clarification” as to whether the justice spent four days at the retreat for the entire event or was there only briefly.
“I don’t think the explanation they’ve given is credible,” Mr. Pearson said in an interview. He said that if Justice Thomas’s visit was a “four-day, all-expenses paid trip in sunny Palm Springs,” it should have been reported as a gift under federal law.
The Supreme Court had no comment on the issue Monday. Nor did officials at the Federalist Society or at Koch Industries.
Common Cause maintains that Justice Thomas should have disqualified himself from last year’s landmark campaign finance ruling in the Citizens United case, partly because of his ties to the Koch brothers.
In a petition filed with the Justice Department last month, the advocacy group said past appearances at the Koch brothers’ retreat by Justice Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia, along with the conservative political work of Justice Thomas’s wife, had created a possible perception of bias in hearing the case.
The Citizens United decision, with Justice Thomas’s support, freed corporations to engage in direct political spending with little public disclosure. The Koch brothers have been among the main beneficiaries, political analysts say.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



17 Comments so far
Show AllOff with his head!
Clarence Thomas is just one more example of the fascist-greedy-rich, who believe they are entitled to a different set of morals than the rest of us. Just as he believed that it was appropriate to sexually harrass Anita Hill 30 or so years ago, he thinks there is nothing wrong with influence peddling for corporations and other members of his class, who give him and his wife legalized bribes to do their bidding.
What does it take for the AmeriKKKan people to awaken from their slumber and take to the streets?
Not to mention a different set of laws. He should know this, as it is unconstitutional--selective enforcement of the law is unconstitutional. Arrest this tax felon, Mr. Holder. Do your job.
That these egregious guys are still sitting on the court--haven't long ago been impeached-- shows how we have allowed our political system to be made totally dysfunctional: by the same interests they represent.
IMPEACH THE IMMORAL, CRIMINAL SC 5. They are ALL guilty of the same crimes.
Idi Amin Walrus...
one of the many dis-appointments...
Our Mobutu
Or a big pumpkin-headed straw man to keep the focus off the others. You know, those on the court smart enough to not get caught accepting bribes.
The people voted for all this. Why should it be questioned?
We have the best government money can buy.
And if progressives take over, you will cancel government contrasts with veterans, and the military, and government employees. So you would be no more fair, no more just, no better.
Your solution would do as much harm as the current system.
Do you have a reason for thinking that? If so you might have mentioned at least one of them. If not what are you doing on CD?
Really? You know this how?
"Common Cause Questions Justice Thomas' Koch Connection"
Justice Thomas'S Koch Connection...
Rubbish, sir!
YOU are wrong. The 's' in Thomas has zilch to do with the possessive: it's his NAME! The possessive of Chris is Chris's house.
How ignorant. Look it up!!!
If the "s" at a word's ending is a plural "s", then only an apostrophy !