In a startling revelation, documents obtained by the Senate Judiciary Committee indicate that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas took three additional undisclosed trips aboard a private jet provided by Republican megadonor Harlan Crow between 2017 and 2021. The committee released details Thursday, shedding light on previously unreported travels.
The records reveal that Thomas traveled on Crow’s private jet in May 2017 from St. Louis, Missouri, to Kalispell, Montana, with a return to Dallas. Additionally, undisclosed trips occurred in March 2019 from Washington, D.C., to Savannah, Georgia, and back, and in June 2021 between Washington and San Jose, California.
This information, obtained through a subpoena authorized by the committee last November, highlights discrepancies in Thomas’ financial disclosures. Despite Crow providing information covering seven years of transactions, Thomas reportedly omitted these private jet journeys from his recent financial filings.
Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin condemned the undisclosed trips, citing them as part of an ongoing ethical crisis within the Supreme Court. He emphasized the necessity for enforceable codes of conduct for justices.
“Nearly $4.2 million in gifts and even that wasn’t enough for Justice Thomas, with at least three additional trips the Committee found that he has failed to disclose to date,” Durbin said in a statement. “The Senate Judiciary Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Supreme Court’s ethical crisis is producing new information — like what we’ve revealed today — and makes it crystal clear that the highest court needs an enforceable code of conduct, because its members continue to choose not to meet the moment.”
The revelations come amidst broader scrutiny of Thomas’ relationship with Crow, including previously unreported trips to Bali, Indonesia, and Santa Rosa, California, which were later amended in his financial disclosures. The Judiciary Committee’s investigation continues to uncover new details, prompting calls for stricter ethical guidelines within the highest court.
The Supreme Court has yet to comment on the matter. Stay tuned for further developments as this story unfolds.
