SCOTUS Ethics Rules Tested Soon. Will Thomas Recuse?

Clarence Thomas recuse himself from Trump’s immunity appeal? Reading that I’m sure your first reaction is “Is this a joke?” followed by “No f**king way.” However incredible as it seems that possibility is floating around DC.

Justices at the Supreme Court have always displayed a “We’re special and you’re not” mentality. Our highest court has varied in the number who serve on it but they have lifetime appointments. While in theory a Justice can be impeached and removed it’s never happened.  They are the sole arbiters of what’s Constitutional and what’s not so this small group of people who once confirmed and sworn in hold incredible power. Practically speaking they answer to no one and most get pissy when someone questions their lofty status. They consider themselves above scrutiny and for damn sure second guessing, much less reproach.

THEY set the rules, but as has often been noted they’ve been famously resistant to the rules they make for others applying to THEM. The issue at hand is judicial ethics and there has long been a well-defined set of rules of conduct and ethics those in the federal judiciary must follow. Except for the nine Justices of the Supreme Court! Legends in their own minds their stubbornness on not having a Code of Ethics and doing what they demand of other federal judges makes mules look like world class eager to please creatures.  Still, a growing outcry forced them to (petulantly) adopt a Code of Ethics last month. However, as many including this article by NPR reports:

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday adopted its first-ever ethics code, bowing to pressure from Congress and the public. All nine justices signed onto the new code, which was instantly criticized for lack of an enforcement mechanism.

I don’t know about you but I’ve not been experiencing “warm fuzzies” over our nation’s highest court actually deciding that by golly they should actually be a model of ethical conduct. Like damned near everyone I’ve figured they were tired of getting hounded and tried to cover a well-deserved PR problem with a fig leaf. More to the point of why I’m talking about this is it was Clarence Thomas in particular, the one after another revelations about all the financial largesse showered on him for decades that led to the new “policy.” Alito and Roberts also drew some (well deserved) heat.

That’s why the article in Raw Story I read a little while ago made my jaw drop. It caused the reactions I described already.  It’s a brief article although it contains a link to a larger, more detailed analysis but Raw Story quotes former U.S. Attorney and current professor of law Joyce Vance extensively. I still have trouble believing it but have to admit (for a reason I’ll get to) this could actually happen. The Justice Trump figures he can count on more than even “his” Justices (the ones he appointed) might step aside and turn a 6-3 conservative majority into a 5-3 one. Uh Oh.

The article describes how in her Week Ahead newsletter Vance says there’s a real possibility Thomas might actually recuse himself. Based on a recent case! Huh? If it happens it would as I’ve said be a major setback for Trump. From Raw Story:

According to Vance, “Given the gravity of the situation, the question of whether Justice Clarence Thomas will participate when the Supreme Court hears the appeal is all the more important,” adding that Thomas has yet to announce whether he will participate in what could be a landmark case.

I don’t want to get my hopes up too much but I can’t help but think “DAYUM!” The article goes on to note Vance pointing out how involved Thomas’ wife Ginni was in the insurrection including her close contact with Mark Meadows. (Although the article doesn’t say it there were other key links between her and the plotters) So there’s that. Vance is quite correct in saying that alone is cause enough (MORE than enough) for Thomas’ recusal. However, it goes to to mention something that has slipped right by me.  I’m sure you know who John Eastman is. He’s indicted along with Trump down in Georgia and is also one of the (so far) unindicted co-conspirators in Trump’s Jan 6. case. The very case we’re talking about here. And John Eastman was once one of Clarence Thomas’ law clerks.  

And also keep in mind a detail that until this morning had slipped right past me. After noting the issues with Ginni Thomas, Vance had this to say:

“Leaving aside the situation with his wife, which would be sufficient to cause any reasonably prudent jurist to sit the case out, Justice Thomas recently recused in another matter involving John Eastman. The relationship was too close for even Clarence Thomas to ignore.”

The combination of his wife and Eastman has Thomas at the wrong end of a double-barreled shotgun – with the wielder not so kindly suggesting “Dude, you might want to sit this one out.” Crazy as the thought sounds given he’s already recused on a matter due to his ties to Eastman Thomas might do so. It’s that part about already stepping back due to Eastman ties that has me thinking this could actually happen. Also, not for nothing I saw a quite short mention somewhere this morning (take this with a grain of salt) that Thomas hinted to a GOP Senator he might resign if “he doesn’t get a raise” and this recusal might not be all that far-fetched after all. Hell, with so much scrutiny Thomas can get away with hundreds of thousands of perks being showered on him by the likes of Harlon Crowe anymore. Maybe he’s getting to the “F**kit. I’m tired of all the scrutiny and I’m going to retire and cash in.”

Well, we will find out soon enough. Trump’s response to Jack Smith’s motion to SCOTUS to hear an emergency appeal on the immunity issue is due this Wednesday. Even Trump (or his lawyers at least) aren’t going to dick around with SCOTUS. The DC Appeals Court’s demand for a response on the 23rd (Friday)? Sure, but not SCOTUS. And SCOTUS demanding a response so quickly indicates they don’t intend to screw around with this matter. They will be deciding quickly on whether to take the case and if they do actually hearing and ruling on it. (The LAST thing Trump wants) So at least in this instance we’re about to find out whether Robert’s new little ethics code means anything – or if it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

This will move fast so stay tuned.