Clarence and Virginia Thomas
Thanks to the way-back machine, researchers at the watchdog organization “Protect Our Elections” dug up this 1991 article from Time Magazine.
Washington-area television viewers were startled last week to see three familiar senatorial faces pop up on their screens above the words WHO WILL JUDGE THE JUDGE? The follow-up question — “How many of these liberal Democrats could themselves pass ethical scrutiny?” — was hardly necessary, since the faces were those of Edward Kennedy, Joseph Biden and Alan Cranston, all scarred veterans of highly publicized scandals, from Chappaquiddick to plagiarized speeches to the Keating Five.
The ad, produced by two independent right-wing groups, was intended to bolster Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas’ confirmation chances by pointing the finger at three liberal Democrats who seemed likely to oppose him. Not coincidentally, the ad was produced by the same people who launched the 1988 Willie Horton spot….
President George H.W. Bush, his chief of staff John Sununu, and Clarence Thomas himself denounced the ads and demanded they be pulled. But the sponsors of the ads kept right on running them.
Can you guess who paid $100,000 for those ads in support of Thomas’ nomination to SCOTUS?
Those long ago Thomas supporters were “L. Brent Bozell III, chairman of the Conservative Victory Committee, and Floyd Brown, chairman of Citizens United.“
Yes, Citizens United, the group that last year won an important case in the Supreme Court that has already been disastrous for democracy in the U.S. From The Jan. 21, 2010 New York Times:
Overruling two important precedents about the First Amendment rights of corporations, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.
The 5-to-4 decision was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment’s most basic free speech principle — that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said that allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace would corrupt democracy.
Now, can you guess how Justice Clarence Thomas voted? I know I don’t have to tell you. Now check this out:
Eight of the justices did agree that Congress can require corporations to disclose their spending and to run disclaimers with their advertisements, at least in the absence of proof of threats or reprisals. “Disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way,” Justice Kennedy wrote. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented on this point.
Can you believe the gall of this man? He failed to disclose that he had a conflict of interest involving Citizens United. Obviously he should have recused himself from this case. And to top it off, he refuses to sign onto the opinion that corporations running political ads should at least have to provide some disclosure!
Common Cause recently revealed that Justice Thomas had falsified 20 years worth of Supreme Court disclosure forms, failing to list his wife Virginia’s income from work for right wing organizations. Because of Thomas’ falsification of those forms, U.S. citizens did not know that Virginia Thomas was working on George W. Bush’s transition team at the same time her husband was deciding Bush v. Gore.
Common Cause has also asked the Justice Department to investigate both Thomas and fellow conservative Justice Antonin Scalia for their involvement with and financial contributions to organizations operated by the Koch brothers–major supporters of the Tea Party.
Then yesterday, The New York Times reported that Common Cause has asked the Supreme Court to explain why Thomas apparently lied in order to minimize the importance of a speech he gave to to a “retreat” for rich right wingers three years ago.
When questions were first raised about the retreat last month, a court spokeswoman said Justice Thomas had made a “brief drop-by” at the event in Palm Springs, Calif., in January 2008 and had given a talk.
In his financial disclosure report for that year, however, Justice Thomas reported that the Federalist Society, a prominent conservative legal group, had reimbursed him an undisclosed amount for four days of “transportation, meals and accommodations” over the weekend of the retreat. The event is organized by Charles and David Koch, brothers who have used millions of dollars from the energy conglomerate they run in Wichita, Kan., to finance conservative causes.
Now Protect Our Elections has filed two separate bar complaints against Thomas, asking that he be disbarred. They have also asked for an investigation of Thomas by the Public Integrity Division of the Justice Department. From the group’s PR release:
“Justice Thomas was obligated under the Supreme Court’s June 2009 decision in Caperton v. Massey, to disqualify himself from Citizens United,” said ProtectOurElections attorney and spokesman Kevin Zeese. “Indeed, the facts of the two cases are eerily similar, as we now know, with Citizens United Foundation actually supporting Thomas’ nomination and creating what amounted to be millions of dollars in advertising and publicity to attack opposing Senators. Yet, Justice Thomas, just months after the ruling in Caperton, proceeded to sit in judgment of Citizens United without sua sponte recusing himself or disclosing the conflict. Justice Thomas owed his spot on the Court to Citizens United Foundation, and he repaid that debt with his favorable ruling in Citizens United. Clearly, his bias undermined the fairness of the judicial system and deprived the FEC due process.”
You can sign a letter to Congress asking that Thomas be impeached and/or a petition for prosecution of Thomas by the Justice Department at the Protect Our Elections home page.
Clarence Thomas is not fit to serve on U.S. Supreme Court. He must be impeached, and the decision in the Citizens United Case must be reversed.
