OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has become a target for the left in recent months — again — but the attacks on him are not having the desired effect, according to a new survey.
Out of the 1,500 people surveyed, 17 percent said they had a favorable opinion of Thomas, while 10 percent said they had an unfavorable opinion, giving him a net approval rating of +6. The survey was conducted among eligible U.S. voters on June 11th and 12th by the consulting firm Redfield & Wilton Strategies, exclusively on behalf of Newsweek.
Some 14 percent of people said Thomas was “very favorable,” 15 percent “very unfavorable,” 27 percent neither, and 17 percent did not know, the survey found.
The survey and its results come amid attacks by left-wing Democrats over what they allege are scandals, including his refusal to disclose gifts from Republican megadonor Harlan Crow — which he reportedly was not required to do.
Last April, ProPublica, a left-leaning nonprofit investigative media outlet, reported that Thomas had failed to disclose that Crow had covered the costs for luxury trips, multiple private plane flights, skybox tickets to sporting events, and even a relative’s tuition.
Following the report, Thomas defended his relationship with the Texas real estate billionaire. He explained that he and Crow’s family were “among his dearest friends,” whom he has “joined on a number of family trips.”
“Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable,” Thomas further explained. “I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.”
He added: “These guidelines are now being changed, as the committee of the Judicial Conference responsible for financial disclosure for the entire federal judiciary just this past month announced new guidance. And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future.”
Newsweek added:
After the report, Thomas amended his financial disclosure forms and the Supreme Court, but, on Thursday, information about more trips came to light.
The Senate Judiciary Committee cited three trips, which included a private jet flight from Missouri to Montana in May 2017; a second private jet flight from Washington, D.C., to Georgia and back in March 2019; and a further flight from D.C. to California in June 2021.
This, along with similar controversies surrounding Justice Samuel Alito, has led to calls for the court to adopt a stronger ethics code, even after the Supreme Court adopted a new code of conduct in the aftermath of all of this last November.
But for Democrats who claim that Thomas lacks integrity, last October he agreed to step away from consideration of a petition involving an ex-lawyer for former President Donald Trump.
The justice “recused himself from considering a petition to undo a lower court ruling that forced former Donald Trump attorney John Eastman to hand over emails related to the Capitol riot to the House Jan. 6 committee,” the Washington Examiner reported at the time.
“The Justices on Monday denied a request to review a trial court order that forced Eastman to forfeit information to the U.S. House committee investigating the riot at the U.S. Capitol. A line on the orders list indicated that Thomas ‘took no part’ in considering the petition,” the outlet’s report continued.
Before it disbanded earlier this year, the committee spoke with Ginni Thomas, Thomas’s wife and a conservative activist.
During the interview, she reaffirmed her belief that the 2020 election was stolen—a viewpoint consistently echoed by Trump since his defeat in November of that year.
“The recusal note comes as dozens of Democrats in the House have called on the justice to recuse from a major case to be heard this week involving the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s funding mechanism,” the Examiner noted further.
In May, the court ruled 7-2 to uphold the funding mechanism, which does not come from Congress but instead comes from the Federal Reserve. Thomas wrote the majority opinion.
