Democratic lawmakers are urging the Justice Department to investigate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for possible tax crimes and federal ethics violations while ramping up calls for his resignation or impeachment over suspected ethical breaches, including his long-term acceptance of luxury travel and gifts.
Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Ron Wyden of Oregon sent a letter last week to Attorney General Merrick Garland, demanding he appoint a special counsel to investigate whether Thomas knowingly filed false financial statements or failed to pay millions of dollars in taxes for gifts and benefits he received over the past 20 years, though Garland isn’t expected to take action before the November election, legal experts said.
In the memo to Garland, Whitehouse and Wyden cited Thomas’ failure to disclose expensive gifts, free luxury travel, an unpaid loan for a recreational vehicle, and other big-ticket perks he received from his billionaire friends since his appointment to the high court in 1991.
The request amplifies efforts by Senate Democrats to investigate Thomas while enforcing stricter ethics rules, particularly regarding financial disclosures, which Thomas allegedly failed to report accurately.
In particular, the senators want a special counsel to examine whether Justice Thomas breached federal ethics and tax laws by not declaring $267,230 in forgiven debt as income for a luxury RV he acquired decades ago.
“We do not make this request lightly,” the senators stated in a joint statement. “Supreme Court justices are properly expected to obey laws designed to prevent conflicts of interest and the appearance of impropriety and to comply with the federal tax code.”
“No government official should be above the law,” they wrote.
Legal experts said there was enough smoke swirling around Justice Thomas to warrant a government investigation into whether he intentionally failed to disclose gifts as required.
“The question is, when you look at this, is there at least a reason to suspect that there was intentional failure to disclose gifts that the Justice was obligated to disclose?” Fordham School of Law professor Bruce Green said, according to Salon. “There’s obviously, you know, not a basis to indict him. There’s a basis to investigate.”
Garland and the Department of Justice have yet to respond to the request by senators, but legal experts suggest Garland’s reputation for diligence indicates he would likely prioritize the matter.
“But my guess is that at the end of the day, that Attorney General Garland will not appoint a special counsel to investigate before the election,” Green said. “We’re very close to an election where the Justice Department has been accused already of weaponizing criminal prosecution.”
To potentially penalize Thomas, prosecutors must prove that any inaccuracies in his financial disclosures were intentional, not just accidental, according to Stephen Gillers, a legal expert from New York University.
“The special counsel, if one were appointed, would have to decide whether or not falsification of financial statements were a product of willfulness with knowledge,” Gillers said, according to Salon.
Gillers pointed out that it’s a crime to intentionally submit false statements, such as financial disclosures, and he suggested that a special counsel could investigate the tax implications of the gifts Thomas received.
Previously, Thomas’ attorney told senators that the quarter-million-dollar loan to Thomas had been settled as agreed upon, but lawmakers did not appear satisfied with that explanation.
Last week, senators noted that Justice Thomas had multiple opportunities to account for his failure to disclose the gifts to the Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Wyden, and the Judiciary Committee’s federal courts panel, led by Whitehouse.
They accuse Justice Thomas of displaying a “consistent disregard for ethics laws,” which they claim exceeded that of other government officials who have been investigated by the Justice Department for “similar violations.”
Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow and director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute, maintains that Justice Thomas has adhered to Supreme Court ethics rules and dismissed concerns over Thomas’ gift disclosures as part of what he described as a “left-wing dark-money smear campaign.”
He argued that there is no ethical problem with receiving gifts from individuals who do not have business before the court.
The latest uproar over Thomas comes more than a year after a bombshell report by ProPublica that revealed Thomas had regularly taken gifts from a number of billionaire Republican megadonors, including former Berkshire Hathaway executive David Sokol, former Miami Dolphins owner H. Wayne Huizenga, and Harlan Crow, a Dallas real estate tycoon, among others.
Crow, however, was the person who really elevated the lifestyle of the conservative justice following some financial struggles during Thomas’ early years on the high court.
Thomas’ rich friend paid for him to take extravagant vacations around the world on a private jet ,while also funding exotic cruises aboard a luxury yacht, but Thomas kept this information secret from lawmakers, according to records.
As recently as June, Senate Democrats released a series of documents showing Justice Thomas failed to disclose at least three private flights he took with Crow between 2017 and 2021.
The reasons behind the generosity toward Thomas remain uncertain, raising concerns about potential attempts to influence and corrupt the nation’s highest court.
In several interviews, Crow has insisted that he and Thomas were simply good friends who enjoyed each other’s company and that Thomas had not ruled in any cases involving his business holdings.
A report from a group called Fix the Court showed Thomas had received more gifts than any other Supreme Court justice in history, with the total value of these gifts since 1981 exceeding $5.87 million, with almost $4.2 million received in just the last 20 years, according to the readout from the committee.
Some gifts received by Thomas helped cover various living costs, including private school tuition for his grandnephew, car batteries and tires for the family vehicles, ProPublica reported.
Justice Thomas never reported any of it on his annual financial disclosures despite receiving ultra-expensive gifts over the span of more than 20 years.
The Senate Finance Committee is also investigating Thomas’ financial dealings over the past two decades amid increased calls for tougher ethics rules and for Thomas to resign.
The newest documents reveal Justice Thomas hopscotching across the country at will, indicating he flew on Crow’s private jet from St. Louis to Kalispell, Montana, in May 2017, before proceeding to Dallas. Then, in March 2019, the conservative justice took the billionaire’s private jet from Washington, D.C., to Savannah, Georgia, and back. In June 2021, Thomas flew in secret from D.C. to San Jose, California, and back, according to the logs obtained by the Judiciary Committee.
Records showed Thomas took three trips that were not previously disclosed.
Lawmakers have been trying to leverage each ethical controversy involving Thomas as a platform to call for a code of conduct that imposes real consequences for actions that are seen as eroding trust in the Supreme Court.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, criticized Thomas for what he described as a clear failure on ethics and propriety.
“Nearly $4.2 million in gifts and even that wasn’t enough for Justice Thomas, with at least three additional trips the Committee found that he has failed to disclose to date,” Durbin said in a press release. “The Senate Judiciary Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Supreme Court’s ethical crisis is producing new information — like what we’ve revealed today — and makes it crystal clear that the highest court needs an enforceable code of conduct, because its members continue to choose not to meet the moment.”
Previously, Thomas only acknowledged receiving 27 gifts on federal disclosure forms before Fix the Court released their research, while his lack of transparency has led to ongoing discussions on Capitol Hill about judicial ethics.
Legal experts suggested that the failure to disclose the trips was not likely to result in any sort of penalty for Thomas.
The Code of Conduct for Justices, established in November 2023, lacks any provisions for consequences in case of violations, nor does it provide a mechanism to determine if such violations have taken place.
Without any real enforceable power, the code has increasingly drawn criticism amid various ethics scandals engulfing the Supreme Court over the past year.
More recently, the controversy surrounding Justice Samuel Alito and the display at two of his residences of far-right flags that referenced the Jan. 6 attack has only highlighted the code’s ineffectiveness.
Last June, Alito also sought to dispel a ProPublica report alleging he went on a luxury Alaskan fishing excursion 15 years ago with a billionaire Republican donor whose hedge fund was the subject of several high court rulings in which Alito never recused himself.
Democrats have been targeting Thomas since at least early 2022 — more than a year before the gifts to Thomas came to light.
New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez led the charge, urging the veteran justice to resign or face impeachment for alleged ethical breaches, including failure to disclose income and his refusal to recuse himself from cases involving his wife, Ginni Thomas, a prominent Republican activist with strong conservative ties.
“Clarence Thomas should resign,” Ocasio-Cortez said at the time, according to The Hill. “If not, his failure to disclose income from right-wing organizations, recuse himself from matters involving his wife, and his vote to block the Jan 6th commission from key information must be investigated and could serve as grounds for impeachment.”
Ocasio-Cortez joined a chorus of Democratic lawmakers and legal experts who expressed outrage following reports of Ginni Thomas’ involvement in efforts to overturn former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss.
The revelations raised new concerns about Justice Thomas not recusing himself from cases related to the 2020 presidential election, despite his wife’s active involvement in efforts to challenge its outcome.
In January 2022, Justice Thomas raised eyebrows on Capitol Hill after he cast the sole dissenting vote in an 8-1 Supreme Court decision that allowed House investigators to access White House records related to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection near the end of Trump’s term.
After the 2020 election, Ginni Thomas allegedly exchanged numerous text messages with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows as part of strategic discussions on how to overturn Joe Biden’s victory, which Ginni Thomas described as an “obvious fraud” and “the greatest heist in our history.”
The controversial remarks sparked demands for Justice Thomas to recuse himself from future cases related to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 insurrection, but despite these calls, Thomas has steadfastly declined to abstain from any related rulings.
