Justice Clarence Thomas has formally disclosed for the first time trips to Bali, Indonesia and the elite Bohemian Grove club in California — both paid for by his friend and billionaire Harlan Crow — that were at the center of an explosive ProPublica report last year exposing the unreported financial ties to a GOP benefactor.
Thomas acknowledged in his latest annual financial report, released Friday, that he had “inadvertently omitted” reimbursement for food and lodging expenses for the July 2019 travel.
He did not disclose the value of the one-night hotel stay in Bali or three-night stay at the private club. The justice also did not disclose private jet transportation to Indonesia or travel on a luxury yacht, both of which were reportedly provided by Crow.
Thomas reported no travel or reimbursements for 2023. He reports accepting one gift last year: a pair of $2,000 photo albums from Terry Giroux, the outgoing executive director of the Horatio Alger Association.
The filings, as required by the Ethics and Government Act of 1978, are the first from Thomas and the other justices since the Supreme Court released a formal Code of Conduct late last year, prompted in part by the controversy surrounding Thomas’ previously undisclosed ties to Crow.
In this April 23, 2021 file photo, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas sits during a group photo of the Justices at the Supreme Court in Washington.
Erin Schaff/POOL/AFP via Getty Images, FILE
Harlan Crow, chairman and chief executive officer of Crow Holdings LLC, sits for a photograph at the Old Parkland estate offices in Dallas, Texas, Oct. 2, 2015.
Chris Goodney/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Justice Samuel Alito was the only justice who received an extension to file his report.
The filings offer one of the only windows into the financial interests of the Supreme Court justices and their spouses, providing a modicum of transparency to an otherwise highly opaque branch of government.
While few of the justices reported accepting any gifts of value last year, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted more than $12,500 in donated art to decorate her chambers and four Beyonce concert tickets worth more than $3,711.
Several justices reported earning six-figure book royalties well above their government salaries.
Trending Reader Picks
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who has a legal memoir in the works, reported a $340,000 advance from Regenery Publishing. Justice Jackson, whose memoir is due for release in September, noted a $893,750 advance from Penguin Random House. Justice Neil Gorsuch reported a $250,000 book royalty from Harper Collins, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted an $86,783 payout from Penguin.
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a group portrait following the addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP, FILE
Associate justices each earn $298,500 in annual government salary; the chief justice earns $312,200. Additional “outside earned income” is capped at $32,000 per year under federal judiciary rules.
“Each justice would be capable of earning 10 times their current salary in the private sector, so it’s reasonable for them to want to boost their income as authors, especially those with inspiring life stories,” said Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, a left-leaning watchdog group. “This may be an unpopular opinion, but I don’t see anything ethically compromising about it so long as the justices don’t use their offices to hawk books, they speak to ideologically diverse audiences on their book tours, and they recuse from petitions involving their publishers.”
Justice Sotomayor reported earning $1,879 for a voice performance in the animated PBS television series “Alma’s Way.”
Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch each reported more than $10,000 in teaching income at law schools.
Many of the justices also indicated acceptance of all-expenses-paid trips last year for professional functions – such as conference lectures, academic ceremonies, and historic commemorations.
Chief Justice John Roberts was the only member of the Supreme Court to list no gifts, outside income or travel reimbursement of any kind.
Roth said there are also indications that several justices paid their own way for certain, publicly-reported trips that didn’t appear on the forms – including Justice Elena Kagan’s trip to San Diego to christen a Navy ship and her attendance at a tennis tournament. Justice Barrett also appears to have declined $5,000 honorariums for speaking at the University of Minnesota Law School.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recently revealed in his financial disclosure forms that he took several trips in 2019 that were funded by billionaire businessman Harlan Crow. This revelation has raised questions about potential conflicts of interest and the influence of wealthy donors on the highest court in the land.
According to the disclosure forms, Justice Thomas took four trips in 2019 that were paid for by Crow, who is a prominent Republican donor and real estate developer. The trips included stays at Crow’s private estate in Texas, as well as travel expenses for Thomas and his wife to attend events hosted by conservative organizations.
While it is not uncommon for Supreme Court justices to accept gifts or travel expenses from wealthy donors, the close relationship between Justice Thomas and Crow has raised concerns among ethics experts. Some argue that these types of gifts could create a perception of bias or favoritism, especially if Crow has business interests that come before the Supreme Court.
In response to the controversy, Justice Thomas defended his relationship with Crow, stating that they have been friends for over 20 years and that he sees no conflict of interest in accepting gifts from him. Thomas also pointed out that he has disclosed these trips in his financial filings, as required by law.
However, critics argue that these disclosures are not enough to address the potential ethical issues at play. They point to the fact that Crow has business interests that could be affected by Supreme Court decisions, and that Justice Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow or his associates.
This latest revelation comes at a time when the Supreme Court is facing increased scrutiny over its perceived lack of transparency and accountability. Justices are not bound by the same ethical standards as other federal judges, and there is no formal process for recusal in cases where a justice may have a conflict of interest.
As the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court plays a crucial role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice for all Americans. It is essential that the justices maintain the highest ethical standards and avoid even the appearance of impropriety.
In light of this latest controversy, it is clear that there is a need for greater transparency and accountability on the Supreme Court. Justices should be held to the same ethical standards as other federal judges, and there should be clear guidelines for recusal in cases where a justice may have a conflict of interest.
As the public continues to scrutinize the actions of the Supreme Court justices, it is important that they uphold the integrity of the court and ensure that justice is blind to outside influences. Only then can we have faith in the impartiality and fairness of our highest court.
