Opinion: The steep cost of keeping a Supreme Court justice happy

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas took his seat on the bench in 1991. Since then, he has justified his right-wing activism from the bench under the pretense that he is protecting the Constitution’s original intent as written by the founders in the 1780s.

Thomas rose to the bench following a confirmation hearing mired in claims that he had sexually harassed Anita Hill, his subordinate at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in the 1980s. Those hearings, during which Thomas claimed he was the victim of a “high-tech lynching,” made him a darling of the political right.

Since then, a network of Thomas’ far-right supporters has bankrolled his lavish lifestyle, funding his luxury travel, paying for his adopted grandnephew’s education, buying his mother’s home, and subsidizing his family’s income through unreported payments to his wife, Ginni Thomas.

Let’s break down two of Thomas’ most deep-pocketed supporters, Harlan Crow and Leonard Leo, and how conservative justices are using the so-called shadow docket to keep controversial laws in place.

Harlan Crow

Real estate magnate Harlan Crow is among Thomas’ most generous benefactors.

ProPublica reported on Crow’s relationship with Thomas in April, highlighting the private jet flights, trips to Indonesia, New Zealand, and the Greek islands on Crow’s 162-foot yacht, and annual weeklong stays at Camp Topridge, Crow’s massive private retreat in New York’s Adirondack Mountains.

I calculated it would cost an average person more than $3 million to duplicate Crow’s generosity.

Thomas has not been forthcoming about these in-kind payments and initially declined to answer questions about why he failed to report this bounty. He later claimed he didn’t report Crow’s gifts because an unknown adviser told him he didn’t have to.

This is not the first time Thomas has evaded financial disclosure laws. In 2011, Thomas had to amend his financial disclosure forms for the previous 20 years because he failed to list his wife’s place of employment, a conservative political education group called Liberty Central, as the 1978 Ethics in Government Act requires.

Crow has maintained that his generosity toward Thomas is all the product of a deep friendship that started after he gave the justice a flight on his private jet 27 years ago.

Using publicly available rates for chartering a Bombardier Global 5000 jet like the one owned by Crow, luxury yacht rental rates, and room rates at a Rockefeller-owned resort nearby Camp Topridge, I determined the following:

A round-trip flight on a private jet from the United States to Indonesia and a trip around the island nation on Crow’s yacht, the Michaela Rose, was worth at least $500,000, based on charter jet rates and yacht rental fees. A similar flight and yacht trip to New Zealand was worth at least $583,000. Another jet and yacht trip to the Greek islands was worth at least $519,750.

To calculate the costs of the annual trips to Camp Topridge, the mammoth property built by cereal heiress Marjorie Merriweather Post, I used the nightly rates of the nearby resort cited by ProPublica and the cost of private jet flights to come up with $913,500 in total costs over 20 years.

Finally, a conservative estimate of the value of the flights on Crow’s jet mentioned in the ProPublica piece came to $540,000.

That brought the conservative value of what it would cost to duplicate Crow’s generosity to Thomas to $3,053,250.

Crow’s defense for such generosity, which Thomas never reported on his legally required financial disclosure forms, was that he and his business interests never had any issues before the court that would create a conflict of interest with Thomas.

That narrow reading of the law ignores the reality that Crow and his allies have larger interests in shaping the court than Crow’s commercial real estate ventures. Crow and his cronies aim to influence public policy, from restricting abortion rights to weakening gun safety laws and rolling back access to affordable health care. For more than 30 years, Thomas has been their most reliable ally.

Leonard Leo

No one may be more responsible for the court’s sharp right turn than Leonard Leo, the conservative political activist and one of the founders of the Federalist Society. A shadowy network of dark money groups connected to Leo has spent millions of dollars to advocate for conservative judges to be appointed to the Supreme Court, including Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.

Just how close are Thomas, Crow, and Leo? At Crow’s Camp Topridge hangs a painting of Thomas, Crow, Leo, and other conservative activists smoking cigars and relaxing. 

Like Crow, Leo has helped subsidize the Thomas family’s luxurious lifestyle. Leo paid Ginni Thomas, a far-right political activist and 2020 election denier, for consulting work while ensuring that her name was not included in her billing paperwork, according to documents reviewed by the Washington Post.

Leo said he left Ginni Thomas’ name off the payments because “knowing how disrespectful, malicious, and gossipy people can be, I have always tried to protect the privacy of Justice Thomas and Ginni.”

Obeying the law is not optional, contrary to what Leo seems to think. We have disclosure laws so the public knows who has financial interests or influence with public officials. It’s not an option to ignore the law because disclosure might make Clarence and Ginni Thomas look bad.

Conflicts of interest and the shadow docket

Whether it’s Thomas’ votes for rulings that weaken gun laws or eliminate an almost-50-year-old ruling for abortion rights, his supporters have gotten what they hoped for when he was nominated.

In recent years, that has included Thomas’ increased use of the so-called shadow docket, which University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck calls “a workload that is resolved through summary orders, rather than lengthy opinions after multiple rounds of briefing and oral argument.”

Thomas and other conservative justices have used the shadow docket to uphold controversial laws as they undergo review. During former President Donald Trump’s four years in office, the court’s conservatives routinely used the shadow docket to keep in place lower court decisions and state laws, such as those on abortion and voting rights.

All of this undermines public confidence in a Supreme Court already racked by controversy and ethics scandals. An April survey by Public Policy Polling found broad public support for “requiring organizations that spend money to influence judicial decisions to disclose their largest donors.”

It’s difficult to tell where the beliefs of Thomas’ benefactors end and his begin. Maybe there is no difference at all. But the failure to report any of their generosity makes it impossible for anyone to know where to look. 

By subsidizing Thomas’ lifestyle, his allies have enabled him to live richly on a federal salary. They have rallied to his defense because he’s doing what they want — bending the law to fit their desires while keeping the public in the dark.

Ray Locker is an author, journalist, and executive director of the Checks & Balances Project. He lives in Washington, D.C.