FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jeff Hauser, [email protected]
Today, Take Back the Court, Revolving Door Project, and True North Research released a new database highlighting the troubling connections between the Supreme Court’s right-wing justices, the right-wing organizations that have weighed in on cases before the court, and the major donors funding them. The website, SupremeTransparency.org, catalogs the amicus briefs filed by right-wing groups in cases on the Supreme Court’s 2023-2024 docket in an effort to increase transparency around the right-wing influences aiming to hold sway over the court’s extreme conservative supermajority.
In the 2023-2024 Supreme Court term, nearly one in seven amicus briefs was filed by at least one organization which could pose conflicts of interest with justices on the court. Despite the close ties between amicus filers and powerbrokers, conflicted Supreme Court justices have not recused themselves in any of the cases assessed by this project as of February 2024.
“Supreme corruption demands supreme transparency,” said Sarah Lipton-Lubet, president of Take Back the Court. “It’s no secret that the many of the rich benefactors cozying up to the conservative justices are the same people who fund right-wing organizations with business before the court. But too often, stories about the Supreme Court don’t connect these dots — and as a result, they leave us with an incomplete picture. The truth is right-wing powerbrokers are seemingly paying to play; they’re funding groups that are weighing in on court cases even as they buy access to the justices who will rule on those cases. It’s just one of the ways our Supreme Court is deeply, fundamentally broken, and it’s a reminder of how urgent and necessary it is that we reform this corrupt court.”
“The Supreme Court uses specific cases to create law that applies to vastly more people than the mere named parties in a lawsuit. Far too often people with insidiously close ties to Justices like Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, such as Harlan Crow and Paul Singer, signal their interest in the outcome of cases by funding, leading, or influencing organizations that file amicus briefs. There is just as much of a conflict of interest when a Justice hears a case involving a benefactor as a named party and one in which the person who illicitly enabled their luxurious lifestyle is `merely’ similarly situated to one of the parties,” said Jeff Hauser, Revolving Door Project’s executive director.
Lisa Graves, the Executive Director of True North Research who previously served as a senior advisor on judicial issues in all three branches of the federal government, added:
“The judges on our nation’s highest court should be held to the highest standard of integrity and avoid even the appearance of impropriety, such as hearing cases where reasonable people would conclude that their impartiality is impaired. This new project documents numerous instances where some justices have close ties to benefactors who are also funding special interest groups that file briefs to urge the Court to change our rights. A dark cloud of corruption has engulfed the court helmed by John Roberts as it has handpicked cases to reverse legal precedents, roll back our freedoms, and distort our democracy in alignment with the political agenda of those who have secretly gifted justices with luxury travel and other perks.”
Supreme Transparency shines a spotlight on the complex web connecting justices to powerbrokers and the organizations to which those powerbrokers are connected. In doing so, it illustrates a key potential mechanism for exerting external influence: amicus briefs filed with the court by organizations funded, led, or otherwise significantly connected to a powerbroker with close ties to a Supreme Court justice.
For more information on the project and to look through the data, please visit SupremeTransparency.org.
###