The Thomas-Trump Conflict Hiding in Plain Sight

My new essay at The Hill explains the significance of Justice Thomas’s participation in the Supreme Court’s unanimous rejection of Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s Petition for Certiorari before Judgment. Here is the gist:

The Thomas-Trump conflict hiding in plain sight

Although Special Prosecutor Jack Smith may have suffered only a minor setback when the court rejected his petition to review the immunity issue on an expedited basis, the unanimous ruling revealed a greater problem hiding in plain sight.  

The recent ruling may seem fairly innocuous, with Thomas simply joining a one-sentence order denying Smith’s petition to skip the appellate court, while leaving the ultimate immunity question to be decided another day. However, disqualification provisions apply throughout a proceeding, including the certiorari stage. 

The case for recusal is exceptionally strong by any standard. Virginia Thomas’s deep entanglement in the relevant events would, in the language of the Code of Conduct, surely cause an “unbiased and reasonable person who is aware of all relevant circumstances” to “doubt that the Justice could fairly discharge” his duties. 

By participating at even this early stage of the case, Justice Clarence Thomas indicated that he has no intention of recusing himself in any Trump-related matters — such as the former president’s disqualification from the Colorado Republican primary ballot — notwithstanding a clear conflict of interest due to his wife’s involvement in subverting the 2020 election. 

You can read the entire essay at The Hill.