Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court Justice, recently attempted to address accusations of lack of financial disclosure with what some Democrats are viewing as an inadequate response. Leading the critique is Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), who was clear in his skepticism of Thomas’s efforts, stating via Twitter: “This late-come effort at ‘Clean-up on Aisle Three’ won’t deter us from fully investigating the massive, secret, right-wing billionaire influence in which this Court is enmired.”
Whitehouse, the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on federal courts and oversight, has steadfastly criticized Thomas’s past failures to provide full financial disclosures. In response to this latest act of apparent transparency from Thomas, the Senator launched a detailed argument on Twitter dismantling the reasoning of Elliot Berke, Thomas’s lawyer, who attempted to justify the disclosures.
The Senator declared rebuttals to key assertions made by Thomas’s lawyers, addressing suggestions that “new guidance … revised reporting requirements” excused previous misconduct and that his client’s failings were not “willful.” He voiced concerns over the Court’s handling of their disclosure commitments, openly questioning the sincerity of Thomas’s claims to have sought guidance on financial disclosure early in his tenure.
Moreover, Whitehouse took issue with the insistence from Thomas’s legal representation that the omissions were not willful. This point is of crucial importance because, as the Senator explains, incidents of willful nondisclosure should be referred to the Attorney General for independent investigation. He argues that this desperately needs to occur “to keep this mess in the clubby precincts of the Court and the justices’ own private lawyers.”
It’s clear from Senator Whitehouse’s remarks that he, and likely other Democrats, are unimpressed with Justice Clarence Thomas’s recent attempt at financial transparency. They are calling for continued, thorough investigations into the Court’s financial ties and a more substantial level of accountability from those serving on the Supreme Court.
For the full coverage of this story, visit Above the Law.