Justice Clarence Thomas Responds to Reports of Undisclosed Luxury Trips and Transactions
Justice Clarence Thomas has responded to recent reports suggesting that he failed to disclose luxury trips, flights on private jets, and a real estate transaction with Texas billionaire Harlan Crow. The response came as part of his annual financial disclosure form, which was released on Thursday.
In an unusual move, Justice Thomas included a statement defending his travel with Crow, who is known for his donations to conservative causes. The justice’s decision to fly on Crow’s private jet was addressed in the disclosure, with Thomas suggesting that he had been advised to avoid commercial travel due to security concerns following the leak of a draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.
The annual financial disclosures filed by the justices have faced increased scrutiny in recent years, particularly regarding their financial dealings and the lack of an ethics code for the Supreme Court. While the justices are required to file reports on their investments, gifts, and travel, they are not bound by specific ethics rules.
Justice Thomas’s disclosure also acknowledged errors in his previous financial reports, including omitted personal bank accounts and his wife’s life insurance. He stated that he continues to work with Supreme Court officials and committee staff for guidance on whether he should amend his reports from prior years.
The disclosure also listed four trips from 2022, including speaking engagements and a trip to Crow’s estate in the Adirondacks. It was revealed that Crow had treated Justice Thomas to a series of lavish trips over the years, including flights on his private jet and vacations at his estate. Crow also purchased the justice’s mother’s home in Savannah and covered part of the tuition for Thomas’s great-nephew.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.’s financial disclosure form was also released on Thursday. Alito recently acknowledged taking a private plane on a vacation in 2008 to a fishing lodge in Alaska, where he was hosted by hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer. Alito defended his actions, stating that he was not required to report the trip as it was considered personal hospitality and transportation for a social event.
Both justices have insisted that the gifts and travels did not need to be reported based on their understanding of the rules surrounding personal hospitality from close personal friends. However, these reports have raised questions about the nature of their relationships with wealthy individuals and the potential influence it may have on their decision-making.
As the scrutiny continues, calls for an ethics code for the Supreme Court have grown louder. Critics argue that the lack of clear guidelines leaves room for potential conflicts of interest and undermines public confidence in the judicial system. It remains to be seen whether the justices will face any repercussions for their undisclosed trips and transactions.