US Rep. Ro Khanna (R-CA) on Tuesday offered a blistering takedown of US Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas amid the pair's separate ethics breaches."
Khanna wrote via X (formerly Twitter), "Justice Thomas accepted lavish gifts from billionaire Harlan Crow and now he's deciding a case about Crow's residential company. Justice Alito had a Stop the Steal flag at his home and is now deciding a case about January 6th. You don’t need a law degree to know these are blatant conflicts of interest."
Speaking directly to Alex Aronson during a House Oversight Committee hearing, Executive Director of Court Accountability, Khanna said, "I know sometimes we think this is pretty complex, but it's actually pretty simple. Harlan Crow then, has a real estate firm, which has a case in front of Justice Thomas, while he's giving him these gifts. I don't think you have to go to law school to think this is a conflict of interest."
READ MORE: The supreme scheme: How Alito and Thomas are fueling the ongoing Trump coup
Aronson replied: "No congressman, you're not wrong at all. The federal recusal statute states that any justice shall disqualify himself in any processing in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Of course, this is a statute that is implicated by Alito's flag waving situation, and it's certainly implicated by Justice Thomas' willing receipt of years and years worth of millions of dollars worth of gifts from a real estate magnate who has direct and indirect interest before his court. I think it's more than reasonable to conclude that his impartiality might be questioned reasonably by this decades-long relationship."
The California lawmaker commented: "And Justice Alito, to your point, he has a Stop the Steal flag in front of his house," asking, "Should he have a Stop the Steal flag outside of his house, and then be presiding over a January 6 case? Again, it doesn't seem like you have to be in law school to know this. Am I missing something here about the conflict of interest here?"
Aronson said: "Congressman, I don't think you're missing something. Justice Alito does not contest that the flag was flying outside of his home, he does not contest the political significance of the flag. He says it was his wife's decision to fly the flag. But that's not the question presented by the recusal statute. And his conclusion that no reasonable observer would be able to question his impartiality is flatly false."
READ MORE: Alito slams ProPublica and downplays Thomas’ 'extraordinary ethics breaches' in new audio
Watch the video below or at this link.
