John, this is going to be a long email, but what we have to tell you about Clarence Thomas and his role in an upcoming case is important.

The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America – a case that threatens the funding and the very existence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

So here’s the question: Given his central role in the Horatio Alger Association, should Clarence Thomas rule in the CFPB case when so many Horatio Alger Association members want to weaken the CFPB?

The Alger Association’s membership is made up of wealthy and powerful elites who, according to the group’s tax returns, “spread the message that America’s free enterprise system provides the greatest opportunities in the world for personal achievement and success.”

Thomas’s membership has given him access to a group of elites who have showered him with lavish undisclosed gifts. For his part, Thomas granted the Alger Association rare annual private use of the Supreme Court chambers for its new-member induction ceremony — an event that Thomas personally hosts every year.

According to a review of the Alger Association’s members conducted by the Revolving Door Project, at least 18 Alger members have expressed interest in weakening the CFPB and would benefit if the Court ruled to gut the CFPB.

There’s no need to wonder why: the group's membership includes several bank executives whose banks have been fined millions by the agency.

Thomas’s Alger Association colleagues are not his only ethics concern when it comes to the CFPB case. John Eastman, Thomas's former law clerk (who you may know as Donald Trump's lawyer and alleged co-conspirator in attempts to overturn the 2020 election) filed an “anti-CFPB” amicus brief, as did Americans for Prosperity Foundation, an advocacy organization that is one part of Charles and David Koch’s large conservative political network.

Thomas not only has long-standing ties to the Koch brothers by virtue of camping together over the years at the all-male Bohemian Grove retreat in Northern California, but ProPublica also reports that Thomas attended at least two Koch donor summits where he was used as a “fundraising draw for a network that has brought cases before the Supreme Court.” According to former network employees and a major donor, Thomas was brought in to speak “in the hopes that such access” to him “would encourage donors to continue giving” in support of causes funded by the Koch network.

And now, Thomas is poised to rule on the CFPB's existence.

Given these affiliations, there’s a case to be made that Clarence Thomas lacks the requisite impartiality and independence necessary to adjudicate the CFPB case and should recuse from it.

The only problem is, there is NO binding recusal system or ethics code for the court. We’ve been raising the alarm about this for years. Help us continue this important work.

John, here are some of the members of the elite Alger society alongside Thomas:

• Alger Association President Gregory Abel is a top executive at Berkshire Hathaway. In 2022, the CFPB and Department of Justice secured a $22 million settlement from Berkshire subsidiary Trident Mortgage for illegally redlining majority-minority neighborhoods in Philadelphia. And that wasn’t even the first time a Berkshire subsidiary attracted scrutiny for violating consumer protection laws.
• Alger member Tom Donohue lobbied against the CFPB’s creation in the 2010 Dodd-Frank law and consistently supported exactly what the payday lenders argued to the Supreme Court.
• Alger member Bharat Masrani of TD Bank was fined over $97 million by the CFPB in 2020 for illegal overdraft fees.
• Alger member Brian Lamb of JPMorgan Chase was fined multiple times for illegal mortgage kickbacks, inaccurate account screening, and illegal robo-signing.
• Alger member Josue Robles of USAA was fined over $15 million in 2019 for mishandling fund transfers and customer accounts.

Given these connections, can we expect him to be an impartial judge in this case?

Clarence Thomas’s repeated conflicts of interest and failures to recuse himself make it hard to trust his judgment in this case, and make it clear that ethics reform is needed on the Court. This should not be a call that’s up to Thomas alone.

Thank you,

CREW