Is Ginni Thomas Getting Rich Off Clarence Thomas' Supreme Court Decisions?
Friday 04 February 2011
by: Ian Millhiser | Think Progress | Report

(Photo: White House Archives)
Supreme Court spouse Ginni Thomas has a new job — as the head of a Tea Party lobbying firm called “Liberty Consulting.” Her new firm, which promises to give “voice to principled citizens and the tea party movement in the halls of Congress through governmental affairs efforts” also offers very unusual service to its clients:
Liberty Consulting offers advice for short or long term projects and bringing resources to bear for impact — whether it includes a short term bill-reading project, assistance on congressional oversight efforts or an effective coalition for impact. Additionally, Liberty Consulting offers advice on optimizing political investments for charitable giving in the non-profit world or political causes.
Ginni Thomas’ new career advising clients on how to donate money to political causes is striking in light of the fact that this career path was much more difficult to break into just one year ago. In Citizens United v. FEC, Ginni’s husband Clarence cast the key fifth vote enabling corporations to spend unlimited money influencing U.S. elections. As a result of this vote, outside groups spent nearly $300 million influencing the 2010 elections — much of which would have been illegal before Justice Thomas greenlighted this spending.
Now, Ginni Thomas appears to have found a way to earn money off her husband’s actions as a justice. Clarence Thomas released countless amounts of corporate spending on U.S. elections, and Ginni Thomas can get rich advising those corporate clients on how to direct that spending.
To be sure, it is possible that Ginni is somehow limiting her advice to “political investments” that were legal before Clarence gave businesses like hers so many new potential customers. But if this is the case, Ginni has an obligation to explain just how she is limiting her advice — it’s the only way to remove the obvious cloud of corruption her actions have created around her husband.
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
How many times are he and
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 16:07 — Anonymous (not verified)How many times are he and the cretin Scalia going to be allowed to recuse themselves when Kagen has already recused herself in a much less important case?
Good old Roberts sits there like a Cheshire cat with that dumb grin on his face.
We would be much better off with no Supreme ? Court they are 100% partisan those nasty five. Thanks Papa Bush for that trash Thomas, he and his snow white are disgusting.
Isn't there a question that
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 16:37 — Michael wilson (not verified)Isn't there a question that needs to asked about Thomas's clerical " oversight" in forgetting to report his wives lobbying- related income on his assets reporting. Doesn't it seem likely that even he knew there was a glaring conflict of interest between his wife's activities and the Citizen's United decision and hoped no one would notice the failure to disclose?
Perhaps Judge Thomas is in
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 16:57 — Sam Leopold (not verified)Perhaps Judge Thomas is in self-destruct mode, stretching the envelope of impunity, behavior typical of the super arrogant; could mark the beginning of the end for him.
Where was the liberal media?
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 17:41 — Anonymous (not verified)Where was the liberal media? The Democrats had the Congress when this law was passed and could have impeached him.
Another American success
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 17:58 — Anonymous (not verified)Another American success story. Ack!
We have to stop expecting
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 18:08 — Realist (not verified)We have to stop expecting the Democrats to do the right thing. They had a majority in the Congress for four years and did nothing with it that benefits Main Street in any significant way. They added the capture of the White House and veto-proof majorities that Blue Dogs sabotaged to keep the Republican agenda alive.
We need other electoral options than the slate of two-faced one-party corporatists as our candidates. This will be hard to get this installed in our society, but it will be infinitely less hurtful than to allow this political scam to continue indefinitely.
Thomas was the one who
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 19:00 — goobagooba (not verified)Thomas was the one who coined the phrase. So why hasn't technology been able to touch this oreo?
Does anyone doubt that if a
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 21:29 — Cosimo diRondo (not verified)Does anyone doubt that if a "liberal" justice pulled any of this crap that the wheels of impeachment would be rolling right now, with support from the senior leadership of the GOP?
what a country
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 15:17 — jack van Dijk (I am not afraid) (not verified)what a country