Following allegations of ethical violations by Justice Thomas in ProPublica, Democratic lawmakers implore Chief Justice Roberts to investigate ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ 
Brennan Center
Lawmakers Call for Action Following Allegations of Ethical Violations by Justice Thomas
Last week, ProPublica reported that Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose luxury travel provided by billionaire and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow for over 20 years, potentially violating federal law.
In response to ProPublica’s story, Thomas issued a statement saying he “sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable.” However, several legal ethics experts told ProPublica that the Ethics in Government Act “clearly requires that gifts of transportation, including private flights, be disclosed.”
Eighteen Democratic lawmakers have since sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts calling for him to conduct an investigation “into these and other outstanding allegations of unethical, and potentially unlawful, conduct at the Supreme Court.” The letter also calls on the chief justice to adopt a binding code of ethics, as the justices are the only federal judges in the country who are not bound by an ethics code. All the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee sent Roberts an additional letter announcing that they will hold a hearing on judicial ethics “in the coming days.”
On April 13, ProPublica also revealed that Harlan Crow purchased properties from Justice Thomas, including Thomas’ mother’s home, that the justice likewise failed to disclose.
 
Mississippi Senator Blocks Nomination of District Attorney to the Federal Bench
 
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS) is declining to return a “blue slip” for President Joe Biden’s nomination of District Attorney Scott Colom to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi.
Although Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) returned his blue slip for Colom, Hyde-Smith said she has a “number of concerns” about his record, such as his “opposition to legislation to protect female athletes” and the “significant support his campaign [for district attorney] received from George Soros.”
Despite Hyde-Smith’s opposition, the White House has announced it will not withdraw Colom’s nomination. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “Sen. Hyde-Smith is preventing the people of Mississippi from having a judge in place in a timely fashion to uphold the rule of law for her state.”
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL), however, has not yet said whether he will move the nomination without Hyde-Smith’s support. Previously, Senator Durbin said he would “abide by the blue slip custom unless they were used to block candidates because of their race, gender or sexual orientation.”
 
Spending Ramps Up as Pennsylvania Supreme Court Primary Approaches
 
On May 16, four candidates will compete in a primary election to fill a vacancy on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court opened by the death of Chief Justice Max Baer last fall. Deborah Kunselman and Daniel McCaffery will compete in the Democratic primary, and Patricia McCullough and Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio will compete in the Republican primary. The winner of each party’s primary will advance to a partisan general election in November.
The four candidates have raised around $365,000 since the beginning of the year from individual donors, their personal funds, labor unions, and PACs, including one PAC affiliated with Republican state senator and former gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano. However, billionaire Jeff Yass, who spent heavily in past elections for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, has not yet made any contributions.
So far, the fundraising for Pennsylvania’s election pales in comparison to the record-breaking spending in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, which surpassed $42 million. The outcome of that election determined the ideological majority on the court, while Pennsylvania’s election will not. Currently, four Democrats and two Republicans sit on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.