Clarence Thomas isn’t the only one. According to Politico, Neil Gorsuch—Donald Trump’s first pick to the high court—also failed to disclose a real estate deal that could present a conflict of interest for the justice. The outlet reported on Tuesday that Gorsuch sold a 40-acre tract of land in Granby, Colorado to Brian Duffy—the CEO of Greenberg Traurig, the high-powered law firm that routinely does business before the Supreme Court—just days after his confirmation to the bench in 2017. The sale—which reportedly came after two years of trying to find a buyer—brought Gorsuch between $250,001 and $500,000 for his stake, according to financial disclosure forms that notably did not identify the purchaser.
Of note: Duffy’s firm—one of the most powerful in the country—has been involved in at least 22 legal cases before Gorsuch and his fellow justices since the 2017 transaction, according to Politico. (Gorsuch has ruled in favor of the firm’s side eight times and against it four in the 12 cases where his opinion is recorded, as Politico notes.)
Duffy told Politico that he has never met Gorsuch, is not a friend, and was unaware of Gorsuch’s stake in the property when he first made the offer. Gorsuch did not comment on the sale to Politico, and the Supreme Court did not immediately return Vanity Fair’s request for comment. But news of the transaction underscores a glaring lack of transparency and integrity in the nation’s highest court, and highlights the need for real reform.
“We have seen a steady stream of revelations regarding Supreme Court Justices falling short of the ethical standards expected of other federal judges and of public servants,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin, who has called Chief Justice John Roberts to testify before his committee in response to Thomas’s reported ethics violations. “The need for Supreme Court ethics reform is clear, and if the Court does not take adequate action, Congress must.”
The renewed calls for accountability come amid several reports on Thomas’s friendship with conservative billionaire Harlan Crow, who for years has gifted the conservative justice with luxury vacations and private travel. In 2014, Crow also purchased properties belonging to Thomas, his mother, and his late brother’s family. Thomas did not report the expensive gifts or the property sales—a massive conflict of interest that also appears to be a clear-cut violation of federal ethics. (Crow, for hist part, has defended his friendship with Thomas, and denied exerting any influence over him. Thomas, meanwhile, has said little about the scandal, but suggested after the initial ProPublica report on his lucrative friendship with Crow that he was unaware he needed to disclose the gifts.)
While concerningly similar, there do appear to be some differences between the Thomas scandal and the burgeoning Gorsuch matter; Duffy says he and the conservative justice have no relationship, and records show he has mostly donated to Democrats in recent years. Still, the transaction raises serious concerns about the court, and reinforces the need to hold justices to the same standard to which others in the judiciary are held.
As I reported last week, it’s unclear how lawmakers will be able to force them to do that. Republicans have mostly shrugged at the controversy, almost certainly taking the possibility of impeaching Thomas off the table. And Thomas has shown himself indifferent to his responsibility to the public, likely closing the door to resignation. The Justice Department could investigate, as watchdog groups and Democrats have called for, and Roberts could initiate an internal inquiry, as Durbin has demanded. But it remains to be seen whether either of those come to pass.
While Democrats might have little recourse to hold Thomas—and now Gorsuch—individually accountable for their transgressions, they can mobilize around reform. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a leading critic of the rogue court, has already introduced legislation that would strengthen ethical and transparency rules for members on the bench. And the Gorsuch report Tuesday only stresses the need for Congress to take up such legislation with urgency. “There is absolutely nothing that is difficult or complicated about this,” as Whitehouse told me last week. “It’s not like something new or special has to be invented. You just make more or less what every circuit court already does, and transfer it to the Supreme Court.”