ProPublica released a new report on Friday detailing Justice Clarence Thomas’ close relationship with the Koch brothers with previously undisclosed and extraordinarily damning new details.

According to ProPublica, the justice developed a friendship with the Kochs as they were funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into right-wing causes, many of which ended up before the Supreme Court. The brothers then used Thomas to raise money for their sprawling network, inviting him to speak at “donor events” that brought in millions of dollars.

He disclosed none of these activities on his annual disclosure forms, an obvious violation of federal ethics law.

  • Armen12@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    90
    ·
    1 year ago

    You people make it sound like Thomas is somehow responsible for the slew of right-wing decisions of the court and not the fact that trump got 3 judges in there

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      85
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are both problems, but if blatant corruption concerns you less than which way they naturally lean, you might be a partisan moron.

      • Armen12@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        60
        ·
        1 year ago

        The republicans aren’t calling for him to step down so this is partisan politics, not an actual call for ethics reform.

    • Nougat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      Clarence Thomas has been a skeevy moron for a loooong time. Of course Trump’s three appointments are why certain cases are getting pushed to SCOTUS, and why they’re being ruled on the way they are, and I don’t think anyone is trying to put that on Thomas alone.

      The court has shifted hard right, and Thomas is corrupt.

      • Armen12@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        Did I say he wasn’t? The fact that he’s being targeted alone is the issue I have, there’s 0 articles posted here talking about any other judge

        • VenoraTheBarbarian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh shit, do you have evidence of other justices engaging in a similar level of corruption?? I’m very interested to see any articles or evidence you have to that effect.

          Otherwise engage with the topic at hand, which is Thomas and the Koch brothers.

          • Illuminostro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well, Scalia, Roberts, and Alito have some stank on them, but one is dead, and the other two were smart enough to cover their tracks better. Kavanaugh had hundreds of thousands of dollars in gambling debt magically disappear before he was seated. I wonder if “whoever” paid that off wants something in return…

            • VenoraTheBarbarian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              None of those rise to the rank of "wHy aReN’t wE tAlKiNg aBoUt ThEm?? though. The crimes or corruption of a dead guy, and Kavanaugh whose corruption was widely discussed before and during and after his confirmation, don’t warrant changing the topic away from crimes and corruption freshly unearthed about Thomas.

              Dude was being distracting on purpose.

              • Illuminostro@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                What are you talking about? Who is changing the topic? I’m saying ALL of the conservative Justices are as corrupt as Thomas. The Heritage Foundation, which is heavily connected to Koch, pushed Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. They’re ALL bought and paid for.

                • VenoraTheBarbarian@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Did I say he wasn’t? The fact that he’s being targeted alone is the issue I have, there’s 0 articles posted here talking about any other judge

                  This is the comment I had a problem with, not yours. Thomas isn’t being “targeted” , he’s having huge scandals break. He isn’t being targeted alone the scandals of his peers have broken years ago (the ones that have broken thus far anyway, I’m sure there’s more we don’t know about yet). And those scandals were widely discussed at the time they broke.

                  Why would there be current articles about the other justices when we don’t have current scandals for them? That’s why I say the dude (not you, you’re good) was trying to change the topic.

        • Nougat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve seen Alito come up a time or two, especially in the context of his insistence that there are no checks on the judicial branch. But he’s been in some comprimising ethical situations like Thomas has, too.

          People are only able to post here about news that is reported. The dominos are falling fast on Thomas. I’d bet that there is some kind of investigation already going on into Thomas’ and other SCOTUS justices around unethical payments, and that so much is being discovered about Thomas that the presumed investigation will become public quite soon. The other justices? Maybe they’re being looked at very closely, too, but their dominos aren’t falling as fast.

          We don’t know exactly why so many details about Thomas’ receiving payments under the table are reaching the media to be reported on, but somebody is digging, and they’re digging like it’s their job, because it very likely is. There’s a lot that is not publicly known, so quit acting like randos on the internet should be posting news stories that don’t exist. Or if they do exist, post them your fucking self.

          • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Clarence had like a 15 year head start on the supreme Court. It’s going to take Sam a little while to catch up.

    • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s almost like having appointed supreme court judges without term limits is a colossally bad idea

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like many things, the core concept was good for the time… To try to insulate the court from unstable politics and presidential whims, in the interests of a stable legal system that doesnt have to be afraid of being replaced when they displease the president.

        its just no one had the foresight to see that one side would betray the country 200 years in the future and turn the court into a corrupt, bought and paid for factory from which the undermining and destruction of democracy could be launched.

        The Supreme Court was thrown into chaos because republicans refused to appoint any justices under Obama (Edit. I neglected to specify in his last year, Thanks to the next poster for pointing that out), This giving them more than enough picks under their guy to permanantly damage the court and skew it forever in their favor short of radical action.

        • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think “in his last year” matters. That’s some calvinball nonsense McConnell pulled out of his ass to justify grinding the function of his branch of government to a halt and everyone just… went along with it. The year isn’t what mattered, what mattered was that Obama was a black Democratic president and McConnell thought he could get away with it.

        • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The Supreme Court was thrown into chaos because republicans refused to appoint any justices under Obama

          Now, now, Obama DID get Sotomayor and Kagan. McConnell only blocked Merrick Garland.

          That being said, in my lifetime, Democratic Presidents have only put FIVE members on the court, Republicans got 15. Carter is the one who drew a blank.

          Nixon/Ford got as many in their two terms as all the Democrats since then COMBINED.

          https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/members_text.aspx

          Ginsburg, Ruth Bader - Clinton
          Breyer, Stephen G. - Clinton
          Sotomayor, Sonia - Obama
          Kagan, Elena - Obama
          Jackson, Ketanji Brown - Biden

          Burger, Warren Earl - Nixon
          Blackmun, Harry A. - Nixon
          Powell, Lewis F., Jr. - Nixon
          Rehnquist, William H. - Nixon
          Stevens, John Paul - Ford
          O’Connor, Sandra Day - Reagan
          Scalia, Antonin - Reagan
          Kennedy, Anthony M. - Reagan
          Souter, David H. - Bush, G. H. W.
          Thomas, Clarence - Bush, G. H. W.
          Roberts, John G., Jr. - Bush, G. W.
          Alito, Samuel A., Jr. - Bush, G. W.
          Gorsuch, Neil M. - Trump
          Kavanaugh, Brett M. - Trump
          Barrett, Amy Coney - Trump

          • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Now, now, Obama DID get Sotomayor and Kagan. McConnell only blocked Merrick Garland.

            You are right. I forgot to specify in his last year, that is entirely on me.

        • Illuminostro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “The Founders” (I hate that term) were trusting everyone would act in good faith, and be of good moral character. They were very mistaken.

      • Illuminostro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        But if God didn’t want them to be there, they wouldn’t be. And we all know God doesn’t make mistakes, and knows best, don’t we? 'Murica! What Index Fund Would Jeebus Use?

    • Nvrmnd@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      If he’s the deciding vote, which he was on Citizen’s United IIRC, then yes, he’s got a LOT to answer for because apparently he should have been recusing himself on quite a number of cases where he basically voted the way he’d been paid too.

    • chaogomu@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      A lot of the shit Thomas has slipped into his writing over the years has been used to justify the worst parts of the recent terms.

      Thomas is the most right-wing of the current justices, so much so that he has actually (partially) dissented when the other right-wingers don’t go far enough for his tastes.

      One of the others will write something, and he’ll come in with a concurrence and try to take it so much further, and he does it every single time he’s not given the majority opinion.