[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1353 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>






118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1353

 Impeaching Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of 
          the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 10, 2024

 Ms. Ocasio-Cortez (for herself, Ms. Escobar, Ms. Crockett, Mr. Frost, 
Ms. Stansbury, Mr. Casar, Mr. Bowman, Ms. Lee of California, Ms. Omar, 
    Mrs. Ramirez, Mr. Takano, Ms. Tlaib, Ms. Velazquez, Mrs. Watson 
 Coleman, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. McCollum, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Bush, and Ms. 
   Wilson of Florida) submitted the following resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Impeaching Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of 
          the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Resolved, That Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice of the Supreme 
Court of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and 
misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be 
exhibited to the United States Senate:
     Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people 
of the United States of America, against Clarence Thomas, Associate 
Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, in maintenance and 
support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and 
misdemeanors.

                     article i: failure to disclose

    
    The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives ``shall 
have the sole Power of Impeachment'' and that all civil officers of the 
United States ``shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and 
Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and 
Misdemeanors''. Sections 13103 and 13104 of title 5, United States 
Code, require judicial officers, including Associate Justices of the 
Supreme Court, to file annual reports disclosing financial income, 
gifts and reimbursements, property interests, liabilities, 
transactions, among other information. Specifically, section 
13104(a)(2)(A) of such title requires disclosure of the ``identity of 
the source, a brief description, and the value of all gifts'' exceeding 
minimal value, and section 13104(a)(5)(A) of such title requires 
disclosure of ``a brief description, the date, and category of value of 
any purchase, sale or exchange'' of real property exceeding $1,000.
    Clarence Thomas, in his conduct as an Associate Justice of the 
Supreme Court of the United States, engaged in high crimes and 
misdemeanors, by refusing to report the source, description, and value 
of gifts, and by failing to report the description, date, and category 
of his sale of real estate property, as follows:
    Over the course of at least 15 years, Justice Thomas and his wife, 
Virginia ``Ginni'' Thomas, have received gifts of significant value 
from Harlan Crow without reporting the source, description, and value 
of such gifts.
    Throughout such time, Mr. Crow has served on the Board of Directors 
of the American Enterprise Institute, which regularly files amicus 
briefs in Supreme Court cases and whose position Justice Thomas has 
regularly adopted.
    The unreported gifts include, but are not limited to: non-
commercial transportation on a private airplane and on a yacht to and 
from Indonesia in 2019, valued at approximately $500,000; non-
commercial transportation on a yacht to and around New Zealand in or 
around 2013; non-commercial transportation on a yacht to and around 
Greece in 2007; extensive free lodging and food at Topridge, a resort 
in the Adirondacks owned by a company owned or controlled by Mr. Crow; 
multiple trips via non-commercial transportation on a private airplane 
on multiple occasions, including but not limited to flights to New 
Haven, Connecticut, in 2016, to Dallas, Texas, in 2018 and again in 
2022, to New York City in 2021, and to Topridge Resort in New York in 
2022; and tuition payments, in excess of $6,000 per month, to two 
private boarding schools for Justice Thomas's grandnephew while his 
grandnephew lived with Justice Thomas and was in Justice Thomas's legal 
custody.
    Justice Thomas failed to disclose the 2014 sale of a single-story 
home and two vacant lots previously held by Justice Thomas and two 
family members, to Mr. Crow for $133,363, an amount significantly 
higher than the price of other properties in the neighborhood and 
significantly higher than $15,000, the amount that Justice Thomas 
valued his one-third stake in the properties in 2010. Mr. Crow has also 
permitted Justice Thomas's mother to continue living in the home rent-
free through at least May 2023, and has paid for improvements for the 
benefit of Justice Thomas's mother, including construction of a car 
port. In 2023, Justice Thomas retroactively amended his 2014 report to 
report the real estate sales transactions involving Mr. Crow, but to 
date Justice Thomas has yet to disclose both the free rent and the 
improvements that constitute additional gifts that Justice Thomas was 
required, but failed, to disclose.
    By accepting but failing to disclose multiple gifts of luxury 
vacations and travel, Justice Thomas has undermined the impartiality 
and integrity of the Supreme Court in violation of the public trust. 
His conduct has caused a reasonable person to believe the gifts were 
offered and accepted in return for being influenced in the performance 
of an official act and from the same or different sources on a basis so 
frequent that a reasonable person would believe that he used his public 
office for his own private gain or for the private gain of his donors.
    In all of this, Justice Thomas has acted in a manner contrary to 
his trust as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United 
States, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, to the 
manifest injury of the people of the United States.
    Wherefore, Justice Thomas, by such conduct, warrants impeachment 
and trial and removal from office, and disqualification to hold and 
enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

   article ii: refusal to recuse from matters involving his spouse's 
                           financial interest

    
    The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives ``shall 
have the sole Power of Impeachment'' and that all civil officers of the 
United States ``shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and 
Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and 
Misdemeanors''. Section 455 of title 28, United States Code, provides 
that ``[a]ny justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States 
shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality 
might reasonably be questioned''.
    Clarence Thomas, in his conduct as an Associate Justice of the 
Supreme Court of the United States, engaged in high crimes and 
misdemeanors, by refusing to disqualify himself from proceedings in 
which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, as follows:
    Justice Thomas participated in the consideration and decision of 
numerous proceedings concerning entities in which his spouse, Virginia 
``Ginni'' Thomas, had a financial interest.
    In 2011, Harlan Crow contributed $500,000 to Liberty Central, an 
organization founded by Mrs. Thomas and which, in 2010, paid Mrs. 
Thomas a salary of $120,000. Before, during, and after this 
contribution, Mr. Crow has served on the Board of Directors of the 
American Enterprise Institute, which regularly files amicus briefs in 
Supreme Court cases and whose position Justice Thomas has regularly 
adopted.
    Between June 2011 and June 2012, Mrs. Thomas's firm, Liberty 
Consulting, received at least $80,000 in consulting fees as part of an 
arrangement devised by Leonard Leo. Mr. Leo advises a nonprofit called 
the Judicial Education Project, now known as The 85 Fund, which 
regularly files briefs before the Supreme Court, including in 2012. The 
details of the payment plan were specifically crafted to avoid listing 
Mrs. Thomas's name on any paperwork that might become public. Mr. Leo 
instructed a for-profit firm, The Polling Company, to act as an 
intermediary by billing the Judicial Education Project, and then 
transmitting those funds to Liberty Consulting.
    In consequence of Mrs. Thomas's financial interest and compensation 
from entities that regularly file briefs before the Supreme Court, or 
from donors that fund such entities, Justice Thomas had a legal 
obligation under section 455 of title 28, United States Code, to 
disqualify himself from proceedings in which those entities 
participated. Yet on multiple occasions, Justice Thomas participated in 
such proceedings anyway. By flagrantly violating Federal ethics law, 
Justice Thomas betrayed his Judicial Oath to ``faithfully and 
impartially discharge and perform'' his duties ``under the Constitution 
and laws of the United States''.
    In all of this, Justice Thomas has acted in a manner contrary to 
his trust as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United 
States, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, to the 
manifest injury of the people of the United States.
    Wherefore, Justice Thomas, by such conduct, warrants impeachment 
and trial and removal from office, and disqualification to hold and 
enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

  article iii: refusal to recuse from matters concerning his spouse's 
                             legal interest

    
    The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives ``shall 
have the sole Power of Impeachment'' and that all civil officers of the 
United States ``shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and 
Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and 
Misdemeanors''. Section 455 of title 28, United States Code, provides 
that ``[a]ny justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States 
shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality 
might reasonably be questioned''.
    Clarence Thomas, in his conduct as an Associate Justice of the 
Supreme Court of the United States, engaged in high crimes and 
misdemeanors, by refusing to disqualify himself from proceedings in 
which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, as follows:
    Justice Thomas participated in the consideration and decision of 
numerous proceedings concerning challenges to the outcome of the 2020 
Presidential election in which his spouse, Virginia ``Ginni'' Thomas, 
had an interest.
    For instance, Justice Thomas participated in the consideration and 
decision of two cases in which Texas and the Republican Party of 
Pennsylvania, respectively, sought to induce the Federal judiciary to 
throw out the lawful ballots of thousands of Pennsylvania voters. Not 
only did Justice Thomas vote to advance these factually baseless and 
legally frivolous claims, but he also abused his seat on our Nation's 
highest court to promote the falsehood of massive voter fraud and to 
question the legitimacy of the 2020 Presidential election results. 
Texas v. Pennsylvania, 592 U.S. ____ (2021) (Dec. 11, 2020) (No. 155, 
Orig.) (Alito, J., dissenting from denial of leave to file bill of 
complaint, joined by Thomas, J.); Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. 
Degraffenreid, 592 U.S. ____ (2021) (Thomas, J., dissenting from denial 
of certiorari). Justice Thomas also participated in the consideration 
and decision of proceedings concerning the insurrection at the United 
States Capitol on January 6, 2021--proceedings in which Mrs. Thomas had 
an interest.
    On December 23, 2021, Donald Trump submitted an emergency 
application for a stay and an injunction to Chief Justice John G. 
Roberts, seeking to prevent the National Archives from releasing 
records concerning Mr. Trump's attempt to overturn his defeat in the 
2020 Presidential election to the House Select Committee to Investigate 
the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. Chief Justice 
Roberts referred Mr. Trump's application to the full Supreme Court. 
These records included communications by White House Chief of Staff 
Mark Meadows. Because Mr. Meadows had been texting with Mrs. Thomas on 
or around January 6, 2021, it is possible that these records included 
texts between the two of them.
    On January 19, 2022, the Court denied Mr. Trump's application--
refusing to block the release of the records. Trump v. Thompson, 595 U. 
S. ____ (2022) (Jan. 19, 2022) (No. 21-272). Not only did Justice 
Thomas take part in the consideration and decision of that proceeding, 
but Justice Thomas was the only justice who indicated that he would 
have voted to grant Mr. Trump's application.
    As part of that same litigation, Mr. Trump petitioned the Supreme 
Court for a writ of certiorari, asking the Court to reverse the 
decision below refusing to enjoin the National Archives from turning 
over these records to the Select Committee. The Court denied Mr. 
Trump's petition. Trump v. Thompson, 595 U.S. ____ (Feb. 22, 2022) (No. 
21-932). Again, Justice Thomas participated in the consideration and 
decision of this proceeding.
    Justice Thomas's impartiality in the aforementioned proceedings 
might reasonably be questioned because Mrs. Thomas actively 
participated in contemporaneous political and legal efforts to overturn 
Mr. Trump's defeat in the 2020 Presidential election. Indeed, Mrs. 
Thomas's interest in the outcome of these proceedings thoroughly 
compromised Justice Thomas's impartiality in any case challenging the 
results of the 2020 Presidential election or concerning the events of 
January 6, 2021.
    In the weeks between the Presidential election on November 7, 2020, 
and the violent insurrection at the United States Capitol on January 6, 
2021, Mrs. Thomas repeatedly urged then-President Trump to illegally 
overturn the election results and advised Mr. Trump on his litigation 
strategy, including in an exchange of at least 29 text messages about 
the election with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows:
    Mrs. Thomas advised the President to initiate and sustain 
political, legal, and extralegal attempts to overturn the results of 
the 2020 Presidential election (writing, ``Do not concede''; ``The 
majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of 
our History''; ``save us from the left taking America down'').
    Mrs. Thomas advised then-President Trump on discrete litigation 
decisions, for instance, urging him to promote and retain Sidney Powell 
as his lead attorney on these matters (writing, ``Don't let her and 
your assets be marginalized instead . . . help her be the lead and the 
face''; ``Sounds like Sidney and her team are getting inundated with 
evidence of fraud. Make a plan. Release the Kraken'').
    Mrs. Thomas advised then-President Trump's Chief of Staff on how to 
manage the President's legal team, for instance, directing him to 
confer with and defer to particular attorneys and advisors (writing, 
``listen to . . . Cleta'') and to improve their morale (writing, 
``Suggestion: You need to buck up your team on the inside, Mark''); 
Mrs. Thomas liaised between the White House, the President's personal 
legal team, and other possible participants in the President's attempt 
to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential election, like Jared 
Kushner and the office of Representative Louie Gohmert (writing, ``Just 
forwarded to y[ou]r gmail an email I sent Jared this am. Sidney Powell 
[and] improved coordination now will help the cavalry come and Fraud 
exposed and America saved.''); and, Mrs. Thomas advised the President 
to pursue his unlawful aims by any means necessary, suggesting that he 
disregard his legal and ethical obligations in the pursuit of the aims 
of the attempt to overturn the election (writing, ``the most important 
thing you can realize right now is that there are no rules in war'').
    Throughout this exchange, the President's Chief of Staff engaged 
with and embraced Mrs. Thomas's legal and political advice--confirming 
Mrs. Thomas's status as a trusted participant in these decisions.
    When Justice Thomas participated in the consideration and decision 
of the aforementioned cases concerning the 2020 Presidential election 
and the insurrection at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, 
he knew or should have known of his spouse's participation in the 
attempt to overturn the results of that election.
    Mrs. Thomas implied to others that she had told Justice Thomas 
herself. After the White House Chief of Staff urged Mrs. Thomas to 
maintain her commitment to this ``fight of good versus evil'' (that is, 
overturning the results of the 2020 Presidential election), she replied 
that she was encouraged by ``a conversation with my best friend just 
now''--using a phrase (``best friend'') that she and Justice Thomas 
publicly use to refer to one another.
    Even if Mrs. Thomas did not directly inform Justice Thomas of her 
participation, much of Mrs. Thomas's work to overturn the results of 
the election was a matter of public record as she performed it: 
planning the January 6, 2021 ``Stop the Steal'' rally as one of just 
nine members of the board of Council for National Policy Action, 
attending that rally, and signing a public letter alongside prominent 
far-right leaders urging House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to expel 
two House Republicans in retaliation for their service on the Select 
Committee investigating the insurrection.
    In the exceedingly unlikely event that Justice Thomas was unaware 
that his spouse was privately and publicly working to overturn the 
results of the 2020 Presidential election, he was derelict in his legal 
and ethical duties to know. Federal law required him to make a 
reasonable effort to discover a fact so obviously relevant to his role 
as one of the final arbiters of litigation about the election: section 
455(c) of title 28, United States Code, is explicit that Justice Thomas 
had a duty to ``inform himself'' of his spouse's interests.
    In consequence of Mrs. Thomas's collaboration with then-President 
Trump to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential election, 
Justice Thomas had a legal obligation under section 455 of title 28, 
United States Code, to disqualify himself from proceedings concerning 
that election and the endeavor to overturn it by litigation, force, or 
fraud. Yet on multiple occasions, Justice Thomas participated in 
proceedings concerning the election anyway. By flagrantly violating 
Federal ethics law, Justice Thomas betrayed his Judicial Oath to 
``faithfully and impartially discharge and perform'' his duties ``under 
the Constitution and laws of the United States''.
    In all of this, Justice Thomas has acted in a manner contrary to 
his trust as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United 
States, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, to the 
manifest injury of the people of the United States.
    Wherefore, Justice Thomas, by such conduct, warrants impeachment 
and trial and removal from office, and disqualification to hold and 
enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.
                                 <all>