Clarence Thomas recused himself Monday as the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from John Eastman, a former legal adviser to Donald Trump, who had asked the Court to reverse a previous ruling which held that his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election potentially constituted a crime.
In March, a California federal judge ruled that Eastman’s advice to then-President Trump advocating overturning the 2020 election results “more likely than not” constituted a crime. Eastman, a Constitutional law professor, controversially advanced the argument that Vice-President Mike Pence could avoid certifying the election results.
Because Eastman’s actions were potentially criminal, the judge ruled that a since-disbanded January 6 House committee had the right to view emails that had been archived by his former employer, Chapman University.
“The illegality of the plan was obvious,” Judge David Carter wrote. “Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections. Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the vice president to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election.”
“Based on the evidence, the court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6, 2021,” Carter added.
Since the House committee has already obtained and released Eastman’s emails, the case was largely academic, but Eastman argued that the decision had harmed his reputation.
“The crime-fraud ruling of the district court imposes a stigma not only on petitioner,” the petition said, “but also on his former client, the former president of the United States and current candidate for the presidency in 2024.”
On Monday, the Supreme Court rejected Eastman’s appeal challenging the lower court’s ruling that he and Trump attempted to block the certification of 2020 election results.
Although Thomas did not disclose the reason for his decision, in keeping with standard procedure, recent reporting has shown that his wife, Ginni, corresponded with Eastman as well as former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows around the time of the 2020 election. Eastman also previously served as a law clerk for Thomas.
Eastman is one of the 19 defendants named in the Fulton County, Ga., indictment involving the group’s alleged efforts to overturn the presidential-election results in the state.
“Trump and the other Defendants charged in this Indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump,” the unsealed indictment reads. “That conspiracy contained a common plan and purpose to commit two or more acts of racketeering activity in Fulton County, Georgia, elsewhere in the State of Georgia, and in other states.”
Thomas has come under fire in recent months as outlets such as ProPublica began reporting on his friendship with influential conservative donors, particularly billionaire Harlan Crow.
In late August, the Judicial Conference released Thomas’s 2022 financial disclosure forms to address such criticisms. The document, appended with a statement from Thomas’s personal attorney, Elliot Berke, dismissed many of the allegations of indiscretion, suggesting any prior errors were unintentional.
“Justice Thomas’s critics allege that he failed to report gifts from wealthy friends. Untrue,” Berke said in a statement. “He has never accepted a gift from anyone with business before the Court. For anyone who knows him at all, it is clear that no one influences Justice Clarence Thomas’s jurisprudence. But friends are dear, close, and separate. He has included all other reportable gifts on his disclosure forms.”
“Much of the noise to the contrary is based on malicious and sloppy reporting and attacks from partisans who disagree with his jurisprudence and want to drive him and others off the Court,” he added.
“The report released today also includes the disclosure of personal bank accounts and life insurance held by Justice Thomas’s wife, the inadvertent misnaming of his spouse’s family real estate holding, as well as information regarding a real estate transaction in 2014 that resulted in a capital loss, which were inadvertently omitted from prior reports.”