There has never been a straighter line between Thomas' unethical conduct and his jurisprudence.

ProPublica released a new report on Friday detailing Justice Clarence Thomas’ close relationship with the Koch brothers with previously undisclosed and extraordinarily damning new details.

According to ProPublica, the justice developed a friendship with the Kochs as they were funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into right-wing causes, many of which ended up before the Supreme Court. The brothers then used Thomas to raise money for their sprawling network, inviting him to speak at “donor events” that brought in millions of dollars.

He disclosed none of these activities on his annual disclosure forms, an obvious violation of federal ethics law.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    2262·
    1 year ago

    So before, we could only assume from the preponderance of evidence that Thomas is corrupt as shit. Now we know it for a fact. And still, nothing will change because the Koch brothers own more than some SCOTUS justices. They also own most of congress.

    End legalized bribery now.

    • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
      91·
      1 year ago

      And still, nothing will change because the Koch brothers own more than some SCOTUS justices.

      It’s just the Koch brother now. Happily one of the wretched fucks died a few years ago.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        21·
        1 year ago

        If I recall right there’s 3 brothers. Two were right wing scumbags, but I think the third wanted absolutely nothing to do with any of it

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      102·
      1 year ago

      It’s actually not legal to bribe a government official and charging the Kochs and others would be an excellent start (since going after a SC Justice is apparently difficult)

      • DragonAce@lemmy.world
        11·
        1 year ago

        It’s actually not legal to bribe a government official

        Well of course not, thats why they’re not called “bribes”, they’re called “campaign donations”.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        71·
        1 year ago

        Problem is the people who are taking the bribery also get to determine the legality of it. SCOTUS could say that bribing a justice is totally legal and the only recourse would be a new amendment. Even then, I’m not sure what would stop them from ignoring the new amendment in their rulings.

        The problem with the court granting itself judicial review was that it didn’t come with checks and balances like the rest of the government functions.