The ongoing ethics crisis at the Supreme Court persists, not with Justice Clarence Thomas, but with his fellow right-wing Justice Samuel Alito. A recent investigation by ProPublica reveals that in 2008, Alito accepted a trip to a luxurious resort in Alaska, costing over $1,000 per night. This trip was made possible by billionaire hedge fund manager and Republican donor, Paul Singer, who provided his private jet. If Alito had paid for the jet himself, it could have cost him over $100,000 for a one-way trip. However, Alito flew for free.
Six years later, in 2014, Alito ruled in favor of Singer’s hedge fund in a dispute with Argentina, resulting in the hedge fund being paid $2.4 billion. Alito defended his actions in an essay for The Wall Street Journal, claiming there was no corruption or undue influence. He stated that he had only spoken to Singer a few times before the case and that his seat on the flight was of no ethical concern. Alito justified the trip by describing his stay as “rustic” and the meals as “home-style fare.” He denied any obligation to disclose the trip and maintained that it did not affect his impartiality.
Both Alito and Thomas have appeared to benefit from a relationship with wealthy individuals, forming something akin to a “billionaire buddies program.” Leonard Leo, a prominent figure in the conservative legal organization, the Federalist Society, is the common thread in their connections. Leo organized Alito’s fishing trip and vacationed with Thomas. He also directed significant consulting fees to Thomas’s wife. Leo’s influence led to a staggering $1.6 billion donation to his Marble Freedom Trust, likely the largest political donation in American history.
It is clear that Leo’s goal is to shape a conservative court that aligns with his constitutional views. However, questions remain about his relationship with Thomas, Alito, and other conservative justices, as well as his involvement in selecting federal judges and advising President Trump.
Now, imagine yourself as a conservative political activist deeply interested in constitutional law. You identify as an “originalist” or a “textualist” and oppose much of the constitutional framework established in the 20th century. You aim to revert the court back to its original principles, or at least your interpretation of them. You have painstakingly built alliances, networks, and recruited like-minded individuals, judges, and politicians who support your cause. After years of effort, you finally have a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, providing an opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade.
However, the conservative justices on the court aren’t as dependable as you anticipated. They aren’t a unified front, and three of them unexpectedly voted to protect the right to abortion. Although they may have allowed some limits, the fact remains that Roe still stands. But this setback is merely a battle, not the end of the war. You regroup and patiently await the chance to replace the justices with more reliable conservatives. To foster loyalty, you strengthen the bonds between the conservative movement and the judges. You shower them with accolades, organize lavish events in their honor, establish schools in their names, assist their spouses in finding employment, and connect them with influential donors. This strategy aims to create emotional, personal, political, and intellectual connections.
Your beneficiaries are already aligned with your cause, but these social ties make them less likely to go against the prevailing sentiments of their peers. If all the efforts to strengthen these bonds ensure that your justices vote in line with your expectations, then it is money well spent. Moreover, there are more billionaires, additional influence, and further perks available to enhance the justices’ experience while they fulfill their judicial duties.
While our hypothetical activist combines various figures, Leonard Leo serves as the pioneer in navigating the challenge of an independent judiciary. Through his influence, Leo has significantly impacted the current Supreme Court, dictating a third of its membership.
Overall, the Supreme Court’s ethics crisis persists, with Justice Alito’s connections and Leo’s involvement raising questions about the nature of their relationships with conservative justices and their impact on judicial decisions.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
