Common Cause and Justice Thomas

The concerns regarding Scalia and Thomas stem from the Justices' appearances at political retreats sponsored by the Koch brothers, who happen to control the second largest private industry in the United States. Charles and David Koch, of Koch Industries, are known to have spent millions in support of conservative causes, including government control for corporate interests. Scalia's attendance in 2007 and Thomas' attendance at a 2008 workshop seminar have sparked criticism by Common Cause, who asserts that the justices were paid guests at the Koch Industry-organized functions. As Scalia and Thomas were among those responsible for the 5-4 ruling that has led to a great increase in the amount of money being spent on campaigns, Common Cause sites their connections Koch Industry as a cause for investigation. The advocacy organization alleges that the ruling serves to place corporate interests above the interests of the public.

Common Cause has also requested clarification regarding Justice Thomas' role played and time spent at the Palm Springs, California retreat. According to a court spokesperson, Thomas dropped by the event and gave a speech. However, his financial disclosure report for 2008 states that the Federalist Society repaid his costs for the four days of the retreat. Ann Pearson, a vice president at Common Cause, contends that under Federal Law, Thomas should have reported his trip as a gift.


Common Cause has further concerns surrounding Justice Thomas and his participation in the ruling on the Citizens United case. Due to her involvement with the ultra-conservative organization, Liberty Central, it appears as though Justice Thomas' wife stood to benefit from his vote on campaign finance laws. Additionally, Thomas neglected to report his wife's income from Liberty Central on financial disclosure forms. In fact, he checked off the box marked ''none'' for spousal income. Although Thomas claims to have misunderstood the filing instructions, Common Cause suggest that it is unlikely that someone who undertakes complex legal issues on a daily basis would have trouble understanding a basic financial form.