Do Thomas and Scalia have conflicts of interest?


U.S. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia are being accused of having a conflict of interest for (gasp!) associating with conservatives.

According to a report by Politico’s Kenneth Vogel, “Thomas and Scalia have been accused of undermining public confidence in the court by engaging in partisan politics and making decisions that could benefit the political and financial interests of family members and associates. And liberal groups have called on the Justice Department to investigate whether the two justices’ alleged conflicts of interest should have disqualified them from voting in the 2010 decision on political spending, Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission.”

There is even an effort to have Thomas disbarred in Missouri. Common Cause has written a letter to the attorney general asking that Thomas and Scalia be recused from Citizens United.

The real agenda, though the left does hate Citizens United, is probably to get Thomas and/or Scalia off the court before it hears ObamaCare, which should be on a fast track to its pillared doors. This is especially so since Justice Elena Kagan might have to recuse herself if she played a role in the Obama administration by discussing the health care reform law.

Judge Roger Vinson of Florida has given the Justice Department until Thursday to file an appeal of his ruling declaring the whole thing unconstitutional.

Is it a conflict of interest to discuss issues of the day with those of a similar philosophy? It is a court, not a convent. Neither Thomas nor Scalia have a financial conflict in these matters, merely a system of core values with which liberals take umbrage.

Here is a sample of Thomas talking to conservatives: