Over at Slate, legal reporters Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss why ProPublica’s latest revelations about Clarence Thomas and the Koch network are so significant: Clarence Thomas’ Latest Pay-to-Play Scandal Finally Connects All the Dots. As Stern points out, Thomas brags about his judicial steadiness, which he (implausibly) cites as proof that no outside influences affect his rulings.
But conspicuously, Thomas changed his mind on so-called “Chevron deference,” i.e., the notion that agencies’ “reasonable interpretation of ambiguous federal laws” should stand. And he flipped on that standard after being corruptly coopted by the Koch network:
Thomas was a strong supporter of Chevron deference and even wrote a major decision expanding it. But after he was cultivated by the Kochs and became their close friend, he drifted away from Chevron, ultimately renounced and repudiated Chevron deference and is now on the brink of issuing or joining a decision that will overturn Chevron deference this coming term, in a case that is partly funded and supported by the Koch network…
Stern: There’s no speculation required to connect those dots. There had been previous reporting on why Clarence Thomas changed his mind about Chevron deference, because it is a big question. It’s a huge anomaly in his jurisprudence to have an about-face like this, and I think the ProPublica report makes any kind of remaining subtext very clear. He was initiated into this circle through a conscious effort—basically recruited, right?
Lithwick: Groomed. Let’s say groomed… Last go round, we called it quid pro Crow, and now we’re calling it quid pro Koch, but it’s the same pay-to-play.
Thomas has demonstrated repeatedly that he has absolutely no shame. In 2021, he issued a ruling that favored shielding communications among a group of coup plotters that we now know included his wife. So it makes sense to assume he will not recuse in the case this term and will rule in favor of deregulation, just as the Koch network’s long-term strategy envisioned.
It’s hard to get normies to pay much attention to the SCOTUS, though the Dobbs decision seems to be an exception. Maybe that’s a crack in the dam or maybe not. In any case, kudos to ProPublica for keeping the heat on Crooked Clarence. I have a feeling they aren’t done digging up examples of plutocrats plying Thomas and his Fed Soc-approved colleagues with luxuries.
Open thread.
Frankensteinbeck
I get uncomfortable when people use descriptions like this, because ‘Let’s buy judges like mistresses rather than call girls’ is barely sophisticated enough to be a strategy or long-term. They’re not going “And in 15 years, he will be corrupt enough to overturn Chevron!” They’re going “Let’s string him along and see how much we can squeeze out of him” but with added n-words because the Kochs are racist Bircher asswipes. McConnell, that guy had a long-term strategy to put the corrupt, reactionary judges in place who could be bought.
Baud
It’s not corrupt unless they exchanged pleasantries on the tarmac. And, no, in the private jet doesn’t count. It’s tarmac or bust.
JPL
Who would have thought that the guy who was charged with sexual abuse, would end up screwing the American public..
thanks joe!
hueyplong
Their “So what are you going to do about it?” perfectly previews the essence of a hypothetical Trump second presidency.
New Deal democrat
The only way Clarence Thomas intends to leave SCOTUS is feet-first, at least using a Democratic Administration. Let’s be clear about that.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that Justices are supposed to hold their seats “on good behavior,” which Thomas has flagrantly flouted.
There is no reason Congress could not codify such rules of good behavior in their internal rules as standards the violation of which will lead to the commencement of Impeachment proceedings. Ultimately SCOTUS does respond to concerted political pressure (see, “The switch in time that saved the nine”). Eventually several other Justices might pay Thomas a visit in his chambers (as Marshall and Brennan did to Douglas.
It’s at least worth a shot. There is no realistic downside.
Omnes Omnibus
@New Deal democrat: Any standards would have to forward looking. Ex post facto prohibitions and all that.
sdhays
@JPL: My understanding is that Biden figured focusing on Thomas’ record was the better way to prevent him from being approved by the Senate. He understood his colleagues.
Frankensteinbeck
@New Deal democrat:
True enough. I also don’t see our legislators devoting the time and effort to make a huge push out of it when they know there’s no chance of anything passing, though. I believe we’re already at the stage where elected Democrats regularly publicly complain and declare that they have ethics rules they want to pass if the Republicans will stop screaming “But we LIKE corruption!!!” for five seconds. Probably not worth our legislators’ time to push harder than that.
gene108
I wonder if the Koch’s, Crow’s, etc. are as surprised as I am that all the money they’ve spent over the decades buying media, funding think tanks, lobbying groups, astroturf groups, and wining and dining important people that they aren’t completely in charge of everything like they think they should.
I honestly am surprised they don’t run everything with the money, resources, and years they’ve spent trying to gain influence.
Betty Cracker
@Frankensteinbeck: I think my description is accurate if I understand the history correctly, i.e., that deregulation was a Koch goal before Thomas was even on the court, and they took deliberate action over time to bring him around to their POV.
Your string-them-along method seems to fit the corrupt actions of other billionaire sponsors like Crow, Huizenga, et al. It’s less direct, but it’s all a corrupt form of pay-to-play.
Baud
@gene108:
We are scrappy.
MattF
Anyone with a clue about how to deal with this? Besides saying “Stop that or I’ll complain again!” I guess, insofar as there’s an answer, it has to be political.
Another Scott
@Frankensteinbeck: My take’s a little different.
It’s all about access, and the zillionaires know it.
It’s what these junkets to the woods, or to Aspen, or to Davos, or some private island, or “teaching” in Padua, Italy, or whatever, are about. Getting to glad-had with the people who control the laws and their interpretation and enforcement.
It doesn’t have to be a “imma give you gold bars if you do me a favor” for it to be corrupt. Just the effective selling of special access is enough, IMO.
People living in a trailer in a swamp in Mississippi that are being poisoned by the Koch refinery down the road don’t have access to Clarence to talk about the weather, and oh, by the way, it’s horrible that all the school kids in town are getting weird cancers ever since the refinery ramped up production….
This stuff isn’t hard.
It’s not really about the gifts – it’s about the corrupt access and favors and insider exclusives that puts a thumb on the scales of justice. That’s the whole point.
Grr…,
Scott.
Betty Cracker
@New Deal democrat: Agreed.
gene108
@MattF:
Pressure elected representatives to initiate ethics rules. Bombard Congressional offices with phone calls demanding actual ethics rules for the SCOTUS.
I’m personally not that fired up over this to do that.
Edit: A high level of effort with little chance of success.
JPL
@sdhays: My point is that Clarence’s behavior hasn’t changed. Biden was in a tough position, and I get that, but unfortunately we will continue to have Clarence for years.
gene108
@JPL:
Unless he has a fatal heart attack, stroke, or such like.
I hope he drops dead while Democrats control the White House and Senate.
MattF
@sdhays: We appreciate Biden’s experience— and ‘experience’ includes mistakes. Can’t get everything right. Unless, of course, you’re Donald Trump, who has never ever made a mistake. Fallibility has a positive side.
HumboldtBlue
@gene108:
They run the GOP and the Supreme Court, what else is needed?
Omnes Omnibus
@HumboldtBlue: They are playing defense and, little by little, they are losing.
JPL
@gene108: My hope that on his way down, he holds onto Alito and he causes him to conk his head on the marble floor.
two birds with one stone has they say.
Nukular Biskits
Good (late) mornin’, y’all.
I’ve been hammering my two US Senators about the lack of ethics on the SCOTUS and Thomas in particular.
Of course, they’re both “conservative” Republicans, meaning they’re going to ignore me.
Dangerman
@hueyplong: Nothing is gonna change until arresting and jailing a bunch of them happens. DJT is a fine start (and fuck this house arrest shit; get convicted of a felony, wave buh bye to the Secret Service.
Next, pass Universal Basic Income and pay it by taxing the shit out of the uber wealthy. Sure, they will bitch and moan. Who cares?
HumboldtBlue
@Omnes Omnibus:
As long as they keep the Senate and the SC, they’re fine. Their push at the local level — book banning, hating LGBTQ, destroying school districts — is going strong, even with some much-needed pushback.
They may be losing on the hot topic of abortion healthcare but their still well in the game on a hundred other issues.
lee
I’ve been basically on vacation the last 2 weeks so my reading of balloon juice has been rather sporadic.
Had there been a thread about India killing a Canadian citizen?
Yarrow
I kind of wonder why all this is coming out about Clarence Thomas and not much is coming out about other Justices. Is he just the worst, most egregious one? Is he worse than the others at hiding it? Is his corruption easier to find, see, explain? Does someone have it in for him so they keep leaking dirt to ProPublica?
He can’t be the only corrupt one. Where’s the corruption done by the other ones?
wjca
Fixed that for you.
oldgold
The irony is that the supposed contextual on the Court are using the the madness of Marbury to play an outsized super legislative role the Constitution never provided for.
The truth is that Article III of the Constitution was not well thought through. It is damn near as bad as the Bill of Rights.
gene108
@Omnes Omnibus:
“They” are a varied set of interests from the gun lobby to the businesses that want deregulation of environmental laws to the Bible thumpers who are mad they aren’t in charge anymore and some I’m missing.
Not all of them are losing at the same rate.
wjca
He’s been at it longer, so there’s more to find.
Plus, perhaps, getting away with so long may have made him less diligent about hiding it.
Nukular Biskits
@Yarrow:
I’ve wondered the same.
Ethical issues have been reported concerning Coney-Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, but not to the extent as those of Thomas and Alito.
Frankensteinbeck
@HumboldtBlue:
No they’re not. Queer issues are an excellent example. They didn’t even have to play the game 20 years ago. Society agreed with them. They’d won. This is all a desperate attempt at claw back. It’s brutal, it’s scorched-earth, and they’ve actually scored a serious point with Dobbs, but they’re on defense and losing ground.
Another Scott
@Yarrow: The AP story about Gorsuch’s junkets to Padua, etc., in my comment above talks a little about the other justices. Clarence is just the most blatant – that we know about.
Grr…,
Scott.
MattF
@Nukular Biskits: Alito appears, now and then, to realize that some misguided people will sometimes, unaccountably, disagree with him. For Thomas, that’s over, and it makes him careless.
HumboldtBlue
@Nukular Biskits:
Someone paid for Kavanaugh’s house and paid off his credit debt. And whoever that is, is about to get some payback from Kavanaugh regarding voting, just watch.
JR in WV
HumboldtBlue
@Frankensteinbeck:
It’s a distraction, they are still going after voting rights and winning, they’re still getting their donors massive tax breaks, they’re still ensuring schools erase LGBTQ and black/brown faces, all one need do is gaze at Texas or Tennessee or Kentucky.
They may not be winning in California, but they are winning everywhere a state house is GOP, and that’s far too many statehouses.
Righteous Hazard
I will never bash President Biden again. Ever since Obama picked him as veep, but especially since 2020, the dude has just demolished every negative prior I had formed about him from watching him in the senate in the 90s. He has been, hands fucking down, the best president of my lifetime.
I have despised Clarence Thomas from the day that ghwb foisted him on us. That this shitty small minded man was selected to replace a giant like Thurgood Marshall has always sucked, and always will. I will confess that I have been mad at Joe for a long time for his role in the confirmation of Thomas. I have also been mad at myself for not calling senators and rabble-rousing against the nomination after I watched Anita Hill testify. It was a three alarm fire that got treated like a case of heartburn.
But what I have come to realize is that Joe, and the rest of us liberals who were politically active back then, are not to blame for this asshole. It is fucked up, but all we can do now is keep electing people like Joe, who is pretty damned good at fixing fucked up stuff, if we give them the time and support needed to do so.
Nukular Biskits
@MattF:
Had to read that first line twice to get the sarcasm.
All my systems have yet to come online today … LOL!
I think you’re probably right; i.e., Alito thinks he is above such petty concerns whereas Thomas simply DGAF.
tokyokie
@Nukular Biskits: You need to include Roberts, whose wife is a head-hunter for white-shoes law firms and makes far more a year than he does.
Nukular Biskits
@tokyokie:
Good catch. I forgotten about Roberts’ wife.
But, let’s remember the worst ethical lapse of all: Kagan was gifted with bagels.
/snark
Another Scott
@HumboldtBlue: I think it’s pretty-well accepted (by the PTB, anyway) that Kavanaugh’s debts were paid by his well-off parents. PBS.org:
Apparently disclosure rules are that family gifts don’t have to be disclosed. That’s another thing that needs to change (because the people need to know where public servants’ money comes from).
Cheers,
Scott.
trollhattan
@MattF: Shining a light on the corruption makes them pissy, but has no further effect as far as I can tell.
I suppose we eventually end up with a roach subspecies that no longer scurries away when the light is turned on. An apt description for today’s shame-free Republicans
Righteous Hazard
@HumboldtBlue: Yeah, this is why I donate to Mark Elias team whenever I find some coins in the seat cushions.
All we have right now in places like Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Alabama are holding actions that limit the damage the gop is trying to pull off, and competent lawyering like the elias group does is the best bet until grassroots folks in those states can start finding ways to win.
The cold civil war is ongoing
Sister Golden Bear
@HumboldtBlue:
Although “even in California, despite “a deep commitment to advancing the rights of transgender Californians,” Newsom just vetoed a bill that would have required judges to consider whether a parent affirms their child’s gender identity when making custody and visitation decisions.
Disappointing. It’s up to individual judges to interpret, and we know how particular judges can decide that parents being trans supporting can be deemed “harmful.”
Do better, Newsom.
Omnes Omnibus
@Righteous Hazard: Actually, the people in Wisconsin are finding ways to win and that is why the WIGOP is going as crazy as it is.
trollhattan
@Another Scott: Explaining why it was “I like beer” and not “I like Veuve Clicquot, 2013 especially.”
Kayla Rudbek
@JPL: if a prince rapes his servants, he will not hesitate to rape his people (Eric Flint and David Drake, Belisarius series)
Geminid
@lee: The story of the murdered Canadian Sikh did not get a thread of its own but was discussed here on several threads.
Meanwhile, news sites around the world are still covering this developing story. Today Middle East Eye reporter Ragip Soylu (@ragipsoylu) posted a couple items about cooperation between US and Canadian intelligence agencies on this matter.
Soylu also posted an item from Barzou Daragheni:
Baragheni was reposting an item by Murtaza Hussain:
Mr. Hussain linked to an article in The Intercept.
sdhays
@Omnes Omnibus: I was really pleased the last plan spluttered in the end. For a while, it sort of seemed like the WI House Republicans were rabid enough to pull the trigger.
Republicans are burrowed deep, but Wisconsonites are doing the hard work of pulling them out. I hope the WI Supreme Court can end the gerrymandering and allow voters to pick their representatives instead of vice versa.
sdhays
@Geminid: This is a wild story. I hope it ends up being very costly to Mr. Modi and friends.
Villago Delenda Est
@JPL: Not one of Joe’s better moments, for sure.
Villago Delenda Est
@Nukular Biskits: Get me Lindsey Graham’s fainting couch and pearl necklace, stat!
Betty
@trollhattan: The right-wing are out today defending Menendez. Go figure.
Righteous Hazard
@Omnes Omnibus: yeah, thanks for reminding me of that. I need all the optimism I can get. I do believe that this war can be won in every state. The supreme court will take longer to fix, but supporting good people in red states will get that job done too, eventually.
What worries me most is Texas. I have family there, and two winters ago the GOP nearly killed my nephew twice. Once, when he was locked down in his apartment complex few doors away from a AR toting madman who was hunting his way through the complex. And then again when a record cold front broke the brittle libertarian electric grid the GOP uses to enrich themselves. My nephew had no running water, no gas, no electricity, the roads were frozen and me and my brother had a helluva time finding someone with 4wd to evac my nephew before he froze to death in his apartment.
And even after THAT, the GOP just keeps winning there (that pos Dallas mayor switching parties after dem voters elected him fucking SUCKS). I am getting pretty despondent about that place ever being anything but a libertarian death trap for the vulnerable people like my nephew who live there.
WaterGirl
@lee: There has not been a thread yet.
Geminid
@sdhays: I hope so too, but this may turn out to be like the murder of Saudi/American journalist Khashoggi in Saudi Arabia’s Istanbul Consulate. Turkish intelligence agents actually listened to the murder in real time; they had bugged the consulate. Turkish President Erdogan is a zealous opponent of human rights violations when it’s not Turkiye doing the violating, so he froze relations with SA and his officials ghosted theirs.
But after a year or so, then-intelligence chief Hakan Fidan finally took a call from his Saudi counterpart, and the two nations gradually patched up relations.
On his recent trip to the Kingdom, Erdogan actually gave the Crown Prince the traditional hug showing friendship, but his body language showed some reluctance I thought when I saw the picture.
The Biden administration has similarly walked back its reluctance to dea with the Saudi Crown Crown Prince and defacto ruler. Bin Salmon will be in charge for the foreseeable future, and the practical course is to deal with him however repulsive he may be.
FelonyGovt
And John Roberts and Alito get VERY offended that people are questioning the integrity of the Supreme Court…
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Slate did a very good podcast on the Thomas confirmation, and one thing they pointed out was that Thomas and his allies were very successful at building support among Black voters. The whole thing is an interesting and sometimes horrifying fall into the way-back machine.
one thing they didn’t point out but is a hobby-horse of mine: At that time the Democratic Senate caucus included people like Fritz Hollings and John Breaux. Looking over the vote, and trying to remember many years ago when I was just getting addicted to politics, Chuck Robb was considered as liberal a Democrat as you were gonna get out of VA.
trollhattan
@Betty: I read of NewsMax floating “They’re just doing this to Menendez to distract from the real crime, Hunter Biden!”
They really think they’ve got something with Hunter Biden, who has become Benghazi II, Son of Hillary’s Server.
ian
@Yarrow:
They are among the most competent legal minds in the U.S.A. I expect them to be able to shield this stuff from inquisitive minds. The fact that Thomas can’t be bothered to try is what makes this so in your face aggressive.
sdhays
@Geminid: Modi still has to face the voters, so international pressure can still have an effect. Not a given “what” effect, of course.
Geminid
@sdhays: Yes, and the severity of Canadian sanctions and the extent of US support for them may play a role there.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
not all corruption is blatant, cheap and financial. Every one of the Roberts six lied to get on the court, about their beliefs on abortion and precedent for starters. Everybody who was paying attention, and cared, knew it at the time. Alas…
Mike Royko used to say about Boss Daley that he beat out his peers, who might’ve been smarter or better at politics, because they all wanted money and power, and Daley only cared about power.
lee
@Geminid: Thanks for that.
I would like to see some sanctions against India. I work for a company that would be hurt by sanctions and I still support them.
Yeah I know it is hypocritical because of all the shit the CIA has done in the past.
Yarrow
@ian: @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I hear you guys but if you’re not paying too much attention it almost looks like they’re picking on Justice Thomas. I simply can’t believe other Justices didn’t do corrupt things too that could be found out.
New Deal democrat
@Omnes Omnibus: Not a criminal statute, so ex post facto would not apply. Congress is Constitutionally entitled to make its own internal rules, such as specifying what can trigger an Impeachment process.
Another Scott
A.R. Moxon has another good essay up – on bullies, and flamethrowers, and fascists.
Worth a click.
Cheers,
Scott.
Geminid
@lee: Besides the CIA, many people have brought up Israeli intelligence in this context. I guess a distinction can be made that they killed Iranian nuclear scientists, and not their own political opponents.
gene108
@Betty:
Menendez in a serious* legal indictment makes the seat winnable for Republicans in what looks to be a very good year for them to retake the Senate.
Plus, Republicans want to normalize corruption so the public becomes numb to it and resigned to the fact all politicians from both parties are corrupt. This was a motivating factor in dirtying up President Clinton’s reputation, so Democrats couldn’t point to Watergate and Iran-Contra and paint Republicans presidents as corrupt, without a good chunk of people saying “what about Whitewater”.
*Yeah, Bob got indicted on 2017 for getting some perks from an ophthalmologist friend in Florida. There were some issues with possible self-dealing when a non-profit got federal funds and rented an apartment building he owned to accommodate low income renters. Plus he got illegal campaign donations he was “unaware” were illegal and gave the money to charity when the donor was found guilty.
They were sketchy, but there was always some deniability about what he got in return from these activities that had the appearance of impropriety about them.
Gold bars and cash and some evidence linking Bob to pushing an agenda the three people indicted on the paying end of the bribery indictment scandal make this much easier for anyone to follow and get angry about.
** As an NJ resident, I didn’t give a damn about the 2017 indictment. Getting some free private plane rides and vacations from a crooked ophthalmologist didn’t make me want to sacrifice a Democratic Senator, when Donald motherfucking Trump was President and his corruption went unchecked.
New Deal democrat
@Frankensteinbeck: In re “no chance of passing anything,” as an internal rule of each chamber, it would just need a simple majority in whichever House adopted it.
Omnes Omnibus
@New Deal democrat: Good point. My error.
Gvg
@Yarrow: All I can say is my black friends dispose Thomas and have for decades. They are older black women coworkers who drop comments about what their community thinks. They consider him a traitor, obviously. There have been comments about how his family doesn’t agree with him which I didn’t really understand until recently reading about what he had said about his own sister to make himself look better to a white wealthy audience….nasty piece of crap.
Mr. Bemused Senior
It’s all they’ve got, so they’re going with it.
It’s hard to know what effect the Benghazi hearing had on the 2016 election. In my personal opinion it was a net plus for Hillary, though I am biased in her favor so I’m not really a good judge.
Geminid
@gene108: Do New Jersey Republicans have a potentially good Senate candidate?
Geminid
@Mr. Bemused Senior: I thought Secretary Clinton did well in the hearings. The problem was, few people watched them and most got the news second hand.
Another problem generalky with the Benghazi story is that the U.S. diplomat was killed. Had he survived, the blame would have attached to him for taking such a risk when his presence in Benghazi was not critical.
billcinsd
@Yarrow: Did you miss all the hullabaloo about Alito and his trip to Alaska or Kavanaugh’s nomination hearing?