Chart of the Day: Clarence Thomas’ Non-Disclosure Form

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is under fire from Democrats and liberal advocacy groups who contend that he may have violated the Ethics in Government Act by failing to disclose the sources of income for his wife Virginia Thomas. Places like the Heritage Foundation, which has been a vocal opponent of the Obama health care reform law, were paying Virginia Thomas large amounts of money during the years that her husband reported she had no income. (The health care law, of course, is likely to come before the Supreme Court in the next year.)

Initially, the liberal watchdog group Common Cause estimated that Virginia Thomas had made about $700,000 in the years her husband was claiming she made nothing. But the group has recently come up with new figures showing Virginia Thomas actually earned around $1.6 million—more than twice as much as the original estimate. That’s a decent chunk of change the Thomas family was earning from a party with an interest in what could be one of the court’s biggest cases in years.

Thomas has amended his disclosure forms to correct the omissions and has claimed that he misunderstood how to fill out the forms. But Common Cause noticed that Thomas had actually filled the forms out properly for many years before he suddenly stopped recording his wife’s employers. “There is now more than enough evidence to merit a formal inquiry as to whether Justice Thomas willfully failed to make legally required disclosures, perhaps for as long as 13 years,” Common Cause president Bob Edgar said in a statement. “Given that we now know he correctly completed the reports in prior years, it’s hardly plausible—indeed it’s close to unbelievable—that Justice Thomas did not understand the instructions.”

Common Cause provides a breakdown of the missing income here: Courtesy Common CauseCourtesy Common Cause

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate