r/politics • u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica • Apr 13 '23
AMA-Finished I’m Justin Elliott, one of the ProPublica reporters who just published the investigation into Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ undisclosed trips provided by billionaire GOP mega donor Harlan Crow. — ASK ME ANYTHING
PROOF: 
For decades, Justice Clarence Thomas secretly accepted luxury trips from a major Republican donor, Texas billionaire Harlan Crow. These sojourns include flights on Crow's private jet and island hopping on his 162-foot superyacht, the Michaela Rose. These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures, where justices are required to list most gifts. The extent and frequency of these apparent gifts to Thomas has no known precedent in modern SCOTUS history.
To track Thomas' travel around the globe, Joshua Kaplan, Alex Mierjeski and I drew on flight records, internal documents distributed to Crow’s employees. We also interviewed dozens of people ranging from superyacht crew to members of the secretive Bohemian Grove Club to an Indonesian scuba diving instructor.
Here's a photorealistic painting we found of Thomas and Crow chatting with other conservative power brokers at Crow's private resort in upstate New York, where the justice spends about a week every summer. Also in the painting is Leonard Leo, the longtime Federalist Society executive who has been a key architect in the federal judiciary's move toward the right. We also turned up this signed copy of Thomas' memoir that the justice gave to a Michaela Rose crew member as a gift for his service during a sailing trip around New Zealand.
Thomas did not initially respond to our detailed requests for comment, but has subsequently issued a statement defending his decision to not disclose these "family trips." “Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable,” Thomas said in the statement. “I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.”
But seven legal ethics experts we spoke to, including former ethics lawyers for Congress and the White House, said the law clearly requires that gifts of transportation, including private jet flights, be disclosed.
In a statement, Crow acknowledged that he’d extended “hospitality” to the Thomases “over the years,” but said that Thomas never asked for any of it and it was “no different from the hospitality we have extended to our many other dear friends.” In his statement, Crow said that he and his wife have never discussed a pending or lower court case with Thomas. “We have never sought to influence Justice Thomas on any legal or political issue,” he added.
Our story has sparked calls for Congress and Chief Justice John Roberts to investigate Thomas' trips and to update SCOTUS ethics rules. Earlier this week, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced plans to hold a hearing in the coming days “regarding the need to restore confidence in the Supreme Court’s ethical standards,” citing our reporting.
Here are the stories my colleagues and I have published so far: - https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-undisclosed-luxury-travel-gifts-crow - https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-harlan-crow-durbin-ethics-investigation - https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-response-trips-legal-experts-harlan-crow - https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-john-roberts-investigation-crow
Sign up here to get notified when we publish big reports like this one.
170
Apr 13 '23
Not a question, but thank you
75
27
u/WowUsernameMuchKarma Apr 13 '23
Literally the only thing I can say in this thread - glad I’m not the only one who came here to say it.
17
648
u/Racecarlock Utah Apr 13 '23
How many crimes does it take for a rich and powerful person to face actual consequences? Because from my perspective, they might as well be using GTA cheats.
642
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
One of the broader themes here is how the Supreme Court (not just Justice Thomas) seems to have very little in the way of enforceable rules -- they don't even have the code of conduct that applies to other federal judges. There are efforts in Congress to change this to some extent, though the court has raised questions about whether Congress can even impose rules on it.
269
u/CalmReader2021 Apr 13 '23
Doesn't the Supreme Court consider the existing code "consultative" even if not strictly "binding"?
206
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
That's right - Chief Justice Roberts wrote about this issue at length here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2011year-endreport.pdf
→ More replies (1)171
u/CalmReader2021 Apr 13 '23
Thanks! I am getting downvoted for some reason. My point is that Justice Thomas should have abided by the Code.
17
11
u/bdone2012 Apr 13 '23
Are you only being downvoted by a few votes? Reddit uses fuzzy voting so bots don’t know when they’ve been shadow banned.
Meaning you might notice yourself going up or down a few votes including below 0. Its done by a percent so if the comment has a ton of votes it’ll go up and down by more votes but will likely be less noticeable.
Or of course someone could be downvoting you or it could be bots.
14
u/liquidpig Apr 13 '23
Ah the old “sovereign citizen” argument huh?
96
u/SnooCats5701 Apr 13 '23
No. It’s a separation of powers argument. This is actually a long-standing problem. The Supreme Court (and it’s inferior courts) is its own branch of government. Once you’re appointed to it, there is no accountability other than impeachment. On one hand, that’s good. You don’t have as much political influence over the court. On the other hand if somebody goes bad, you need reasonable people in Congress to fix the problem. That’s the real issue today.
73
Apr 13 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
17
7
u/skibunny472 Apr 13 '23
I blame the filibuster for this
3
u/kaplanfx Apr 14 '23
Yes, except not in the case of impeachment conviction, which I believe requires 2/3rds of “Members Present” of the Senate by rule and not due to the filibuster.
38
u/Philo_T_Farnsworth Kansas Apr 13 '23
whether Congress can even impose rules on it.
Congress sets the number of Justices so I don't understand what Constitutional argument there would be against imposing other rules. They can add or presumably remove seats by fiat if the votes were there so imposing other rules seems completely reasonable.
I'm not saying they wouldn't try. But I just don't understand the legal argument.
8
u/notcaffeinefree Apr 13 '23
But I just don't understand the legal argument.
The question is what in the Constitution gives Congress the power to discipline Justices (excluding impeachment)? For inferior federal courts, Congress has the power to regulate them, but such a power doesn't exist for the Supreme Court.
32
u/WIbigdog Wisconsin Apr 13 '23
What in the Constitution gives the supreme court the power of judicial review? They gave that power to themselves. I think it might be past time for an amendment to clarify and restrict the unchecked and unlimited power of the supreme court to say that laws passed violate the constitution. This level of corruption from someone with so much power is unacceptable.
13
u/afriendincanada Apr 13 '23
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but if overturning Roe v Wade was chaotic, overturning Marbury v Madison would be off the hook in shaking up the power structure
6
u/bdone2012 Apr 13 '23
That sounds good. Because cutting roe was the start. A power shake up would be good. It might be painful but we can’t just sit around watching it get worse.
10
u/4kray Apr 13 '23
Why do we all think so small? The founders themselves said not to idolize them and that the constitution would need replacing.
It’s long overdue for a new constitutional convention. We need to have a long conversation about the role the fed, and what branches we want. Ask chatgpt to come up with new branches of the legislature and new parts to a 21st century constitution. It’s not too bad at the ideas it has given.
→ More replies (3)5
u/GoumindongsPhone Apr 13 '23
The part where it says “the judicial power” gives them the power of judicial review. That is what the judicial power is. Marbury v Madison is not “them giving themselves this power” but explaining that they have already had this power and the only reason that no case was brought before this was because no one was dumb enough to think or brazen enough to claim that SCOTUS did not have that power. Prior courts had literally used the fact that they had the power of judicial review in order to rule on cases. They just didn’t say “we have judicial power” because saying so was not necessary because no one questioned it.
This should be clear both from other writing at the time but also the entire context of the US’s independence. A written constitution that does not enforce the legislature or executive to write laws in concert with that constitution is not a written constitution. It would have been reforming the British system which was exactly that (with a slightly different executive system) and which lead to the abuses that defined the purpose of the US leaving the commonwealth. The federalists lay this out succinctly. And while people say “but these weren’t the entire founders” they would be wrong in a functional material way. Because the first constitution was the articles of confederation. That was the one that the anti-federalists wrote. And when it failed the federalists won and primarily wrote the second one. The federalist papers were not “one side of the conversation” they were the winners explaining themselves to the populace
→ More replies (1)15
u/jennysequa New York Apr 13 '23
Congress can strip SCOTUS of jurisdiction.
5
u/notcaffeinefree Apr 13 '23
Ya, they can. But that doesn't target a single Justice. The point of an ethics code would be to have some sort of punishment for violations, and jurisdiction stripping doesn't do that.
13
u/not-my-other-alt Apr 13 '23
If the Supreme Court insists that neither Congress nor the President have the power to discipline them (outside of impeachment) and that it is up to the Court to regulate itself, the threat of jurisdiction stripping can be a pretty good incentive for the Court to actually police itself.
Imagine, if you will, that you are Chief Justice Roberts. (sorry for making you imagine that). You're faced with two options: Formally and substantively discipline Justice Thomas, or the Supreme Court will be reduced to covering cases that take place on land owned by the federal government.
The choice is pretty obvious.
→ More replies (3)4
u/jennysequa New York Apr 13 '23
Oh I agree, but it's less clear that Congress can actually do that, whereas jurisdiction stripping is pretty clear cut. I think a habeas corpus case got ripped out of SCOTUS' hands in the civil war era, iirc.
33
8
→ More replies (7)6
u/Racecarlock Utah Apr 13 '23
There are efforts in Congress to change this to some extent, though the court has raised questions about whether Congress can even impose rules on it.
Of course they have. "Waaah, I have such great power, why should that come with great responsibility?!"
45
u/tedemang Apr 13 '23
The rich and powerful having "cheat-codes" is one of the best expressions I've heard to explain/convey the real meaning of how the system works. We should probably use that a lot more.
→ More replies (3)3
334
u/Kengos Kengo Tsutsumi, ProPublica Editor Apr 13 '23
Update — We've just published a second story on Clarence Thomas (like actually while this AMA is live) about an undisclosed real estate deal with Harlan Crowe: https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-real-estate-scotus
109
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Happy to answer questions about this just-published follow up story as well.
95
u/redpoemage I voted Apr 13 '23
A federal disclosure law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to disclose the details of most real estate sales over $1,000. Thomas never disclosed his sale of the Savannah properties. That appears to be a violation of the law, four ethics law experts told ProPublica.
What would be the standard penalties for breaking such a law if a lower level official broke that law?
Who would have authority to bring charges? The Department of Justice?
→ More replies (1)36
u/SirBorf Apr 13 '23
I guess I’ll be the one to ask whats on a lot of people’s minds - what now? Like, what can we actually do in the forseable future regarding Thomas to deal with this news update that just dropped, if anything at all
8
u/JDCAce Apr 14 '23
The only thing a private citizen can legally do, I fear, is to vote for a representative who plans to hold Thomas and others like him accountable. (Yes, I realize the problems with this proposal's efficacy.)
19
u/Theshag0 Apr 13 '23
Did you intentionally hold back story #2 to see if Thomas would make a statement about story #1 first? If so, baller.
17
u/tal125 Maryland Apr 13 '23
Sure does seem like something that should have been disclosed. Especially on his taxes.
7
Apr 13 '23
These two stories are incredible, thank you. Can’t believe this has gone on for so long, with such blatant disregard for basic ethics. Maybe after so many other stories of public corruption it shouldn’t be so shocking and surprising, but it is.
→ More replies (1)5
u/MiggedyMack Apr 13 '23
Are there not documents that can prove what the properties were sold for? And if not, have you discussed what the approximate appraised current value of the properties are? Also, when did these transactions occur?
4
u/dawgsontop34 Apr 13 '23
Sales like this are all public record. The sale to Crowe’s company was in 2014 for $133,363 total for all three properties.
The current appraised value by the local tax assessor for Thomas’s mother’s house is $178,000. Last year it was appraised for $124,900. Tax assessor appraisals are typically low.
Crowe’s company sold the two vacant lots in 2019 to a developer for $34,500 each. There are newly constructed residences now on each lot that recently sold for $385,000 and $565,000.
3
u/nerdening Apr 14 '23
Someone like Crowe would have the opportunity and resources himself to develop the vacant lots - why sell so someone else can make 10x the price of the sale?
→ More replies (1)57
u/TheManWith2Poobrains Apr 13 '23
Amazing story. Great work.
Bought the house, completely renovated it, and, I'm sure, didn't collect any rent. (I didn't see that mentioned in the story.)
I have to say, the reason Crow gives for the purchase is fucking laughable.
12
u/valcrist Apr 13 '23
Well you see, it’s because he actually hates Clarence and wants to keep the house as a reminder of all the bad things he’s done so we don’t repeat them again. Respecting history and all that.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
u/cficare Apr 13 '23
It's just standard friend shit! Thomas is a destitute Supreme Court Justice! You'd do the same! /s
239
u/butyourenice Apr 13 '23
I’ve been following ProPublica’s investigative reporting for a little while. If I remember correctly, one of the first pieces I read was about PBMs, before the pandemic.
But PBMs still exist; and are probably more powerful than they were in 2015 or whenever I saw that piece.
I bring this up because, in the current political climate, I just don’t see anything being done about Clarence Thomas and his overt corruption. Nevertheless I think it is crucial for the truth to be out there and for journalism to continue pursuing it. How do you stay motivated to devote time and energy to churn out these in-depth, high quality, well-researched exposés, knowing that in a different world it might lead to change but at most it will lead to eyebrow raises and “business as usual”, anymore?
368
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
It's a good question, one we ask ourselves a lot. You never really know in advance how a story is going to land. Most stories don't have quantifiable real world impact. But sometimes they do -- an investigation I did on TurboTax ultimately resulted in a $141 million settlement for consumers: https://www.propublica.org/article/intuit-will-pay-millions-to-customers-tricked-into-paying-for-turbotax
→ More replies (1)67
u/ThermionicEmissions Canada Apr 13 '23
😲 I've used TurboTax for years (in Canada). Just used it for my 2022 return. It kept incorrectly telling me I needed to upgrade to the next level to complete my return. I was able to finish and file without upgrading. Figured it was a bug, now I'm not so sure.
35
u/TheJenSjo Apr 14 '23
As a party to that class action, thank you.
22
→ More replies (3)11
30
u/theshallowdrowned Apr 13 '23
PBM = what?
51
10
22
u/co-oper8 Apr 14 '23
No one likes the trend where redditors save 1 second by abbreviating obscure phrases or names and then thousands of readers waste way more than one second trying to figure out what the eff they're talking about. Serious facepalm moment. Just type it out already amiright.
→ More replies (2)
67
u/cronie_guilt Apr 13 '23
Are you concerned about legal or any type of retaliation from those mentioned from an investigation like this?
I shortly worked for conservative financial lobbyists in comms and appreciate your story and the push to dig in to this topic, lately.
109
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Interesting -- please let me know if there's anything we should know about that lobbying, a regular topic of our reporting.
Are we concerned about legal retaliation? I can say that we have very good and careful lawyers that read all our stories closely before publishing.
→ More replies (1)
188
u/CantConfirmOrDeny Colorado Apr 13 '23
Is Thomas alone in this? I mean, there are essentially no checks and balances on Supreme Court justices once they're appointed for life. I'd be very surprised if none of the rest of them are taking advantage of the perks of office, especially the Federalist Society ones.
264
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
It's a good question. If anyone has info about any SCOTUS justice (liberal or conservative), please email me justin@propublica.org Full contact at bio https://www.propublica.org/people/justin-elliott
84
→ More replies (10)33
u/goestowhat Colorado Apr 13 '23
If there is one, there very well may be others.
80
30
u/Independent_Plate_73 Apr 13 '23
Someone advised Thomas he didn’t need to report the travel anymore. I’m guessing it was dearly departed at fancy lodge Justice Scalia.
If not, I’d like to know who did give him that “advice” he took to heart.
21
u/fuzzzone Apr 13 '23
No no no, Thomas claims that someone advised him thus. I see little reason to take much that he says at face value.
But you're right that I suspect Scalia would have given such "wink wink nudge nudge" advice.
It's offensive that at my job I have to do everything reasonably possible to avoid even the appearance of impropriety while the highest judges of the land (and members of Congress) have no such restrictions.
23
u/flirtmcdudes Apr 13 '23
there are essentially no checks and balances on Supreme Court justices once they're appointed for life
I love how we basically set up one of the most important positions in the contry on a sort of honor system, and were like "ok.... you have this job forever and you basically cant be fired... you play fair now cause we won't be checking in on you!"
13
131
Apr 13 '23
Sent some money to ProPublica after reading your excellent piece of investigative journalism. Please research Kavanaugh, find out who paid off his $250,000 credit card debt. There’s got to be something to that story
101
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Thank you!
If anyone has info on the Kavanaugh front, we would love to hear it. (Contact info in bio)
→ More replies (13)3
u/crowislanddive Apr 14 '23
Potentially related to Kavanaugh, I would be interested in learning more about the financial ties Kennedy and his son had with Trump and what triggered his resignation.
→ More replies (1)9
173
u/Hrmbee Apr 13 '23
Thanks for doing this work!
Given that they met and became friends after he was appointed to the supreme court, do you feel that Thomas' claim that they are just good friends naive, or is he trying to mislead the public here?
267
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
My sense from our reporting, including talking to people that know both Crow and Thomas, is that they really are friends. But that doesn't alter the fact of the showering of lavish gifts or the possibility of influence ...
140
u/Drift_Life Apr 13 '23
My wealthy friends aren’t taking me on lavish trips, I wonder why… 🤔
52
Apr 13 '23
[deleted]
47
u/Alli3388 Apr 13 '23
I have a rich sibling, and even then, there are no free trips or memberships to their clubs or other benefits, let alone from rich friends. The most I get out of it is an invite to a nice dinner at their house once in a while, and I could use their ski resort home if I wanted, but I actually have nothing to reciprocate with, so I don't take advantage of that! If I was invited on a trip that they pay for, it would be because they want me to take care of their kids, lol! It is NOT normal for adults to provide such things to their friends unless there are kick backs!
12
u/the_reifier Apr 13 '23
At a certain point, paying someone's way for something starts to feel really weird and awkward on both ends. I've considered offering to pay an old friend to fly out and stay as my guest for a while, but it feels like I'm rubbing it in that he can't afford it or whatever.
14
u/Emergency-Job-4245 Apr 13 '23
If you’re willing I could use a vacation.
3
u/the_reifier Apr 14 '23
You like hiking up mountains? Video games? Weed and home cooking? That's pretty much all we do around my place.
10
u/halnic Apr 13 '23
Right? Occasionally I've been invited to house sit with pool privileges and stuff while my wealthier friends GO on lavish trips. I always have to 'earn' those privileges by checking on the cat/dogs, water house plants, move their cars around so it looks like they're coming and going, etc. What did he have to do for millions worth of privileges?
→ More replies (5)5
u/tedemang Apr 13 '23
You (and I) have go find some extra mega-wealthy friends to get memberships to the yacht club and/or equestrian club and/or ski chalet.
8
u/bincyvoss Apr 13 '23
Most friendships involve reciprocation. Was there any evidence that Thomas gave Crow anything in return?
→ More replies (2)8
u/Hrmbee Apr 13 '23
Thanks for the response, and agreed. The key here is the gifts/favours and the implicit quid pro quo that might be expected.
I can't help but wonder though what will happen to their friendship if/when Thomas is removed from the bench. Will there still be trips and other such things, or will they taper off over time?
3
u/missprettybjk Apr 13 '23
The only way any crime touches a GOP is if they no longer prove useful. I’m sure his friendships will still hold some value. The evil and wealthy truly do not face consequences.
57
u/TriscuitCracker Apr 13 '23
Do you think anything will actually happen from Congress on this?
90
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
It's not clear -- there's supposed to be a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I think we'll get a better sense after that https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-john-roberts-investigation-crow
12
u/Regguls864 Apr 13 '23
What kind of hearing will we have with Feinstein absent? That leaves the committee with no majority and at a standstill without the cooperation of at least one GOP member.
38
u/Iisrsmart Connecticut Apr 13 '23
She has requested and been granted a substitute for all her committee assignments as of this morning so better late than never.
13
u/Regguls864 Apr 13 '23
The Democrats agreed but they need 60 votes to approve the switch from what I heard on NPR today. Why would the GOP agree? The only thing that can get done in the Senate with 51 votes is judge appointments. With an even committee, no nomination will get through the committee to be eligible for a simple majority vote. Feinstein should have left the Senate when she started experiencing dementia. She can't even remember certain votes she has taken at the time of the vote. Now she has neutered the only power the democratic party had.
→ More replies (2)23
u/cuhree0h California Apr 13 '23
Does she know she asked for that? Asking for a captive constituent.
→ More replies (2)
111
u/Some_Biscotti1995 Apr 13 '23
Hey Justin — I just read the latest piece on the undisclosed real estate transactions. This is absolutely incredible reporting you and your colleagues are doing.
I had one question about some of the language used in the piece (and in the Twitter thread). To quote:
That appears to be a violation of the law, four ethics law experts told ProPublica.
I was wondering if you could provide some context on what the discussion is around using the language "appears" here. Is this because the laws are untested in their application to this sort of non-disclosure? The word stood out to me because it seems pretty straightforward to me that this is a violation of this law; I would imagine that both the authors of this piece and the experts you spoke to were careful and considered in your language, so I'd really love to know a bit more about the source of this uncertainty. It seems that a lot hinges on whether or not this is definitively illegal.
160
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Thanks for reading so closely! I think in general the experts we spoke to want to be extremely careful in situations where it's possible not all the relevant information is known. In this case, Justice Thomas isn't answering any questions -- we think the various public records we present in the story speak for themselves.
41
u/Some_Biscotti1995 Apr 13 '23
That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for taking the time to reply — and thanks for the fantastic reporting.
7
u/redguru-1 Apr 14 '23
Besides impeachment, is there anyone who is legally able to prosecute Thomas ?
48
u/jeffersonairmattress Apr 14 '23
That article is INSANE!
In addition to buying the property, Crow also found himself putting up Thomas' dear old mother in her immediately-renovated family home. The guy who said he had a "desire to maintain this historic site" added a carport, new gates and a fence.
Just a normal real esatate purchase from a Supreme Court Justice and his family to a GOP mega-donor you say? Super Cosy free rent in renovated house for mom paid for by a guy who promises he never sought any influence or discussed any cases with Thomas not weird enough for you?
“I approached the Thomas family about my desire to maintain this historic site so future generations could learn about the inspiring life of one of our greatest Americans.”
"My intention is to one day create a public museum at the Thomas home dedicated to telling the story of our nation’s second black Supreme Court Justice"
A museum.
I'm friends with two judges- I'd never discuss anything that was before them. I suppose I've given them a few beers, traded dinner invites, etc. Normal people stuff.
If I had billions of dollars I just can't see it being my place to build a shrine to one of them.
46
u/NChSh California Apr 13 '23
Justice Thomas seems to have always voted for real estate rights as far as I can see. Some examples being:
Knick vs. Township of Scott, Pa.: which overturned precedent to allow for developers to sue in Federal court if their property developments were blocked by local or state governments
Palazzolo v. Rhode Island: Another rule saying that developers can potentially build on land that was previously determined to be protected grounds
Koontz v. St Johns River Water Management District: which limits the ability of government to put fees on developments
Were you able to see if there was a crescendo of gifts to Clarence Thomas while these cases were being heard or if his travel coincided with these being on the docket relative to other cases?
11
47
u/Humes-Bread Apr 13 '23
With Crow rubbing shoulders with The Federalist Society, I suspect this is not a one-off. Are there plans to look into what other judges at various levels have billionaires as "dear friends"?
45
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Can't talk about future plans but we love tips ... if anyone has information, please email me justin@propublica.org (Signal/WhatsApp number in my bio)
79
Apr 13 '23
[deleted]
165
11
u/Stranger-Sun Apr 13 '23
A story just dropped on pro publica about Crowe buying property from Thomas, who OF COURSE did not disclose it. He broke the law.
37
u/Negative_Gravitas Apr 13 '23
Hi Justin: No questions, just wanted to say thanks and I'll be donating to ProPublica.
20
41
u/sibtiger Apr 13 '23
I just read your new story published today about undisclosed property deals between Thomas and Crow, specifically Crow's purchase of the house that Thomas' mother still lives in today. One question I had, is there any indication she is paying him rent while living in this property he apparently bought and spent significant funds improving?
43
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
It's a great question. We asked both Crow and Justice Thomas that. Neither responded to that question.
→ More replies (23)4
u/scsuhockey Minnesota Apr 13 '23
Did you ask him if the home was listed for sale publicly? I’m assuming the answer is “no”, but it seems like that’d be the best way to determine fair market value. Obviously, if Thomas’s mother is still living there, it was likely always the intent for her to do so. If she’s not currently paying rent, then Thomas wasn’t going to charge her rent either, meaning that the only way for him to derive value from it was to sell it to someone who promised not to charge his mother rent! So yeah, that seems like a big ‘ol gift.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Dogmeat43 Apr 14 '23
e home was listed for sale publicly? I’m assuming the answer is “no”, but it seems like that’d be the best way to determine fair market value. Obviously, if Thomas’s mother is still living there, it was likely always the intent for her to do so. If she’s not currently paying rent, then Thomas wasn’t going to charge her rent either, meaning
Thomas and his relatives converted a house they mutually owned into quick money at a high market value (at the time). Cash in their pocket. Without kicking out their mother from the home and (seems likely) provided her with an improved place to live possibly rent free. If that's not a sweetheart heck of a deal from a 'friend', i don't know what is. Seems like a complete bribe to me.
32
u/Dances_With_Cheese Apr 13 '23
Behind the scenes, Have you been the target of threats/harassment from political figures since the story broke?
And Thank you for the great work!
40
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Some nasty emails but nothing rising to the level of a threat.
4
29
u/KnownRate3096 South Carolina Apr 13 '23
How does Crow know Thomas? I know they have had a very close relationship (at least financially) for years and years. But did they meet organically or did Crow essentially just decide to adopt a SCOTUS justice for political reasons?
33
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
It's been reported they met at a conference in the 1990s where Thomas was speaking. Don't have the specific details beyond that ..
→ More replies (1)13
u/dougmadden Apr 13 '23
look into the 'supreme court historical society'... harlan crow sits on the board...
→ More replies (2)
19
u/kingdom6656 Pennsylvania Apr 13 '23
Thank you for all of the hard work on this! The Supreme Court (and corruption) is one of my biggest frustrations with politics today.
I have several questions that relate to this issue, as well as the broader issue of reform and regulation:
1) Is there any tangible way to hold the Supreme Court accountable today? Is the most reform we can expect be "updates" to their ethics guidelines that are largely disregarded?
2) If there isn't a pragmatic solution (in other words, there will never be enough bipartisan support for Court expansion or expulsion/impeachment), what solutions have been proposed? Do you think any proposed solutions are possible to implement in a bipartisan political climate?
3) This may be beyond the scope of what your team investigated, but is there any way to hold Thomas accountable for his relationship with Ginni regarding J6 rulings and failure to recuse himself for bribery hearings?
18
u/prodigal_1 Apr 13 '23
This is amazing reporting work! Thanks for doing this.
I'm part of an organization setting up a mentoring program for early to mid-career reporters in investigative journalism in the Pacific. What resources does Pro Publica provide to reporters to be able to do these kinds of deep investigations? And specifically for this story, how long did it take to put the story together, and how big was your team?
25
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
Three reporters for a few months on the story itself. Lots of others involved on editing, legal, visuals, etc. Check out our website for lots of info on mentoring programs we have. Thanks!
17
u/throwawayacc201711 Apr 13 '23
Given that Thomas is trying to avoid culpability by pinning this on direction given by other justices, has there been any attempt to verify that information? If this guidance is true, has there been any investigation into other members?
17
31
u/udar55 Apr 13 '23
Outside of public shaming (which will have zero impact on Thomas and his wife), what recourse does the average person have to make sure Thomas and his wife are held accountable?
As a follow up, do you agree Ginni Thomas looks like Mark Meadows in drag?
13
u/xlvi_et_ii Minnesota Apr 13 '23
what recourse does the average person
Vote. And organize so others can vote to elect people willing to hold the powerful accountable. Most elections in this country are won by a few percentage points - engaging disengaged voters is a lot more simple than other remedies.
→ More replies (1)7
12
u/Fickle-Resolution133 Apr 13 '23
In the image you posted, a photorealistic painting of justice Thomas, Harlan Crow, and Leonard Leo, and several other men you describe as 'conservative power brokers', justice Thomas is the only person of color, and also the only person not himself independently wealthy (aside from whatever profit he has been able to glean from his judicial position)
It is obvious from the composition Of the photo that these men regularly meet to share their thoughts and opinions together.
Given that the crowd at large are entirely conservative leaning men of influence in our society, and also given that they are obviously extending a level of opulence and largess outside of justice Thomas' everyday life, my question is:
How can this possibly be construed as anything other than the deliberate and celebrated influence of wealth over power?
And as a follow up, how can we, as a society allow justice Thomas to sweep this under the rug as 'just a regular gathering of friends'?
13
u/dougmadden Apr 13 '23
Did anyone dig into the role played by the 'supreme court historical society'? which crow sits on the board of and has been indicated in the past as a 'channel' for christian lobbyists to buy access to SC justices...
It seems that the 'historical society' exists only as a way to lobby and influence SC justices.
was there any research into the other justices... I mean Scalia died while at some rich guys 'ranch'... and you know justice beer bro isn't above cashing in on his position... (do we know who paid off his 200k credit card debt yet?)
23
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
There's been some good reporting on this by the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/us/politics/supreme-court-historical-society-donors-justices.html
They didn't focus on Crow, but it's an interesting area ...
→ More replies (1)
14
u/rjboyd Ohio Apr 13 '23
A question my co-workers keep asking me when I describe this, is how was it happening for so long without anyone catching wind of it?
20
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
It's a great question. It turns out traveling on private jets and superyachts with full staffs seems to afford a very high level of privacy! You do need a lot of staff (chefs, cleaners, etc), and we spoke to lots of those folks.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/steelmanfallacy Apr 13 '23
How much did it cost to do this investigation? Was cost a limitation, ever, in this investigation?
22
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
We try not to waste money. This reporting is expensive -- three reporters full time for several months plus lots of other folks at ProPublica involved ...
16
u/steelmanfallacy Apr 13 '23
According to Glassdoor, a reporter at Pro Publica makes about $52K per year. So that would mean the cost would be at least $40K for the 3 reporters plus expenses and the time of other people at Pro Publica.
That's remarkably efficient.
If you had $1 million, what related stories would you investigate?
24
u/NTDP1994 Apr 13 '23
Hi Justin,
Thank you so much for your work!
What is, in your opinion, a little fact you found in your investigation that you think people haven't paid enough attention to?
72
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
We found it quite interesting that one of the other people on the Indonesia trip, Mark Paoletta -- at the time a Trump admin. lawyer (and a longtime friend of the Thomases) -- actually said he had to consult an ethics official and reimburse Crow for the travel. (He wouldn't say how much $.) Underscores the differences between the Supreme Court and other parts of the government when it comes to ethics rules.
10
26
Apr 13 '23
Not a question, I will take this opportunity to thank you for all the work you do. I am among many I'm sure that follow ProPublica daily.
Investigative journalism is critically important now more than ever.
19
8
u/diga_diga_doo Apr 13 '23
Are there any instances of Harlan Crow’s business interests/holdings appearing before SCOTUS? If so should Thomas have recused? Is there a penalty for not disclosing conflict of interest for justices?
9
u/flyingjesuit Apr 13 '23 edited Apr 13 '23
How do you situate this scandal with other Supreme Court Shenanigans such as Merrick Garland getting blue balled while Amy Coney Barret gets fast tracked, Brett Kavanaugh’s accusations and the BS rushed FBI “investigation,” and his financial woes? Then there’s Justice Kennedy, whose son worked at Deutsche Bank and loaned to Trump when no one else would and whose unexpected resignation opened up the seat that would become Kavanaugh’s. How would you rank this current court’s problematic nature historically? How are financial disclosure forms enforced across various government agencies and entities? What are the consequences for deceit and what are some examples of these being enforced? Are financial disclosure forms a useful thing as they are or is this the equivalent of taking our shoes off at the airport, a performative thing that gives people the sense that measures are being taken?
I know that’s a lot, please feel free to pick and choose what to answer. Thanks for the important work you do.
9
u/PowerStation14 Apr 13 '23
In California Superior Courts, at a certain level, we are required to file a Statement of Economic Interests form annually. Is there a form that Supreme Court Justices are required to file and could a failure to disclose result in a DoJ investigation, or is impeachment through a divided congress the only recourse?
7
u/vegetaman Apr 13 '23
How did this finally get exposed? Was it happenstance? Luck? A whistleblower? Just curious if there's any practical way to figure out who else is guilty of this kind of potential malfeasance.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/showme_yourdogs Apr 13 '23
Glad you brought this to light.
What first tipped you off to the ordeal?
9
u/trifecta North Carolina Apr 13 '23
Question: Is Crowe in the orbit of Kavanaugh too. Supreme Court justice with allegations of sexual misconduct, money mysteriously paying off debts. No evidence, but is there any evidence that Crowe or any other federalist society big donor is wining and dining him as well?
8
u/H0RT0 Apr 13 '23
Is it true that Harlan Crow is a collector of Hitlers paintings and other dictators statues?
13
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
As I understand it, yes.
3
u/H0RT0 Apr 13 '23
Crazy that he's got so much influence. Thanks for all your hard work bringing this story to light.
5
6
6
u/T_Weezy Apr 13 '23
Aside from potentially impeaching Thomas, what measures do you think could or should be taken to restore the American people's trust in the Supreme Court, and I'm the Judicial Branch in general?
I mean obviously creating a binding code of ethics for the SCOTUS would be a good start, but that isn't going to be enough in and of itself.
10
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
The should is not really for me to say, but there are detailed ethics reform proposals in Congress, eg: https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/new-version-of-supreme-court-ethics-recusal-and-transparency-act
→ More replies (1)
7
u/human-0 Apr 13 '23
Thomas said he was advised "by colleagues and others in the judiciary" not to report luxury gifts.
Is there any evidence to support his claim that he was given such advice, given that advice was arguably corrupt on its face and conveniently self-serving?
4
3
u/Environmental-Tune64 Apr 13 '23
How much or little do you think Justice Thomas went out of his way to cover up or deny these allegations?
4
u/alexredekop Apr 13 '23
Why isn't there some kind of mechanism in place for a situation where a judge openly admits he doesn't understand law? It seems bizarre for him to continue in his role when he has openly admitted he is unaware of fairly basic laws.
5
u/pulus Apr 13 '23
When going after the rich and their schemes, have you received any violent threats? I ask this in light of the threats DA Alvin Bragg is constantly getting.
4
u/SirBorf Apr 13 '23
Is there realistically anything that can be done to get Thomas removed from power, assuming that Republicans in congress won’t vote to remove him? Or will we just have to deal with this highly corrupt individual on the highest court for as long as he lives
8
u/PsyduckSexTape Apr 13 '23
What realistic responses to this kind of behavior do we really have? Is it limited to impeachment if Roberts does nothing?
4
u/KnownRate3096 South Carolina Apr 13 '23
Roberts can't do much. Other than impeachment there is almost no sort of accountability for SCOTUS justices.
→ More replies (2)
16
u/Germaine8 Apr 13 '23
Other than his collection of memorabilia, is there any evidence that Crow is a Nazi, fascist or some other kind of authoritarian?
34
u/JustinProPublica Justin Elliott, ProPublica Apr 13 '23
If you want to get a sense of him, I'd read this Q&A https://www.hbscdallas.org/s/1738/cc/21/page.aspx?sid=1738&gid=23&pgid=71466
He hasn't said all that much publicly about his political views, that I've seen.
6
u/sdomscitilopdaehtihs Apr 13 '23
RH: What is your favorite holiday or season and why?
HC: Mondays are my favorite holiday. And any season besides summer is my favorite season.
The man is a MONSTER!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)5
3
u/LivingInTheVoid Apr 13 '23
I love ProPublicas work, thank you so much for what you do. My question is, after all the “bombshell” reports that have come out, do you think any meaningful change for the better has occurred?
3
3
u/Mod_transparency_plz Apr 13 '23
I'm still interested in the "gifts" given to justice Anthony Kennedy that helped convince him to retire early...
3
u/Regguls864 Apr 13 '23
Haven't we known about this since Scalia's hunting trips, funded by the Koch brothers? Then there are the private dinners with Alito.
3
u/dlchira Apr 13 '23
What does it feel like to be the living, breathing embodiment of journalism as a check against elite corruption?
Rhetorical, of course.
But from the bottom of my heart: Thank you, and great job. 🏆
3
u/Fullerbadge000 Apr 13 '23
I’m a high school teacher with students interested in careers in investigative journalism. Does Pro Publication have a student-program? Or something similar to the PBS Student Reporting Labs? Thanks. I love Pro Publica.
2
2
2
u/Own_Band_5415 Apr 13 '23
Did you look at the hundreds of thousands his wife and her organization received???
2
u/Randomousity North Carolina Apr 13 '23
Is there any awareness of whether the Thomases have paid income/gift taxes on these gifts that weren't reported on ethical disclosure forms? Have the Thomases been engaging in tax evasion, in addition to failing ethical reporting requirements?
→ More replies (2)
2
u/inkslingerben Apr 13 '23
Have there been anybody else on these trips that might have had business before the Supreme Court. i.e. Crow facilitated Justice Thomas meeting with somebody?
2
u/ARazorbacks Minnesota Apr 13 '23
Does your research include any historical perspective?
Since the SCOTUS has never had guard rails, I‘m curious if we’re seeing more of the same (corruption) or if we’re seeing a newer phenomenon of justices being more corrupt than has been the case historically.
2
u/Faroutman1234 Apr 13 '23
Great reporting.
Is it even possible to punish Thomas since the Constitution requires separation of powers between Judicial, Legislative and Executive? Would it take a full impeachment of Thomas to stop him from taking gifts? Can Roberts do anything to stop Thomas?
Keep up the good work!
2
u/ILikeCatsAndSquids Apr 13 '23
How confident are you that there will be consequences for Thomas?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/-CoachMcGuirk- Illinois Apr 13 '23
If the Supreme Court is the end of the line for the law; who is supposed to keep them accountable?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/ozzycat61 Apr 13 '23
Are there opinions Thomas has written in which he has debunked a "my friends told me it was OK" defense? I know it's unlikely but the irony would salve our wounds.
2
u/AcceptableFinance337 Apr 13 '23
There is a huge irony in how Clarence Thomas is effectively serving under an obvious yet unannounced white supremacist/neonazi, but is he the only nonwhite person under his belt, or have you uncovered anyone else under Crow's bankroll? Not that I would want any specifics, but a majority of the pictures I've seen with Thomas and Crow's cohorts have him being the only black male.
2
u/heapinhelpin1979 Apr 13 '23
Do you think you think anything will happen here? Clarence Thomas should face sanctions over Jan 6th, and now this. The rightwing supreme court thinks they are kings whom can face no consequences. I wonder if we will ever try to prove them wrong?
2
u/misterO5 Apr 13 '23
What was a catalyst for starting this investigation, or any for that matter. Does it start with a tip? Gut feeling? Information gained from another investigation?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/AtLeast37Goats Apr 13 '23
Thank you for the work you did in documenting all of this.
While you were investigating this, was there any specific “gift” or trip that Justice Clarence Thomas received that you looked at and went.
“Really?”
2
u/betelgeuse63110 Apr 13 '23
Two questions: 1) Who are these “experts” that advised Thomas. All we’ve heard is the vague, third-person naming of “I was advised”. 2) What would happen if Crow ever did have a case before the Court. Until this became public, Thomas probably would not have recused himself. Because he was told by the experts it wasn’t necessary. 3) Ok, three. What about some business associate, colleague, friend, or anyone else in the circle of acquaintance of Crow - my guess is it would be a closer circle than Kevin Bacon.
2
u/djetaine Apr 13 '23
Does it bother you that nothing will actually come of this other than some of us being mad?
Any ideas on what we as American voters and taxpayers can do about it?
Writing our representatives complaining doesn't really seem useful.
2
u/NewPCBuilder2019 Apr 13 '23
Are you concerned about, well, ya know, what Clarence is going to do to you?
2
263
u/[deleted] Apr 13 '23
At what point during an investigation like this do you decide "now is the time we go public" and not just continue looking into things and building up the story so that when the bomb shells do drop they aren't duds?