Qtec
01-23-2011, 03:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Clarence Thomas failed to report wife's income, watchdog says
Virginia Thomas earned over $680,000 from conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation over 5 years, a group says. But the Supreme Court justice did not include it on financial disclosure forms.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to report his wife's income from a conservative think tank on financial disclosure forms for at least five years, the watchdog group Common Cause said Friday.
Between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, earned $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation, according to a Common Cause review of the foundation's IRS records. Thomas failed to note the income in his Supreme Court financial disclosure forms for those years, instead checking a box labeled "none" where "spousal noninvestment income" would be disclosed.
A Supreme Court spokesperson could not be reached for comment late Friday. But Virginia Thomas' employment by the Heritage Foundation was well known at the time.
Virginia Thomas also has been active in the group Liberty Central, <u>an organization she founded to restore the "founding principles" of limited government and individual liberty.</u><span style="color: #990000">Mmmmmm...where have I heard that before?</span>
In his 2009 disclosure, Justice Thomas also reported spousal income as "none." Common Cause contends that Liberty Central paid Virginia Thomas an unknown salary that year.
Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas' omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.
"<u>It wasn't a miscalculation; he simply omitted his wife's source of income for six years,</u> which is a rather dramatic omission," Gillers said. "It could not have been an oversight." </div></div>
Bought and paid for.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In the case, <u>Citizens United </u>vs. Federal Election Commission, the court ruled that corporate and union funds could be spent directly on election advertising.
The Koch brothers have been key supporters of the group Americans for Prosperity, which spent heavily in the 2010 midterm election and claims a nonprofit tax status that allows it to avoid disclosing its donors.
<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Clarence Thomas has been the lone justice to argue that laws requiring public disclosure of large political contributions are unconstitutional.</span>
A Supreme Court spokesperson later said that Thomas dropped by the private event, but that Scalia did not attend. </div></div>
This all part of a RW strategy.
' If we can't change the law ,change the judges.'
Q link (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-thomas-disclosure-20110122,0,2413407.story)
Virginia Thomas earned over $680,000 from conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation over 5 years, a group says. But the Supreme Court justice did not include it on financial disclosure forms.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to report his wife's income from a conservative think tank on financial disclosure forms for at least five years, the watchdog group Common Cause said Friday.
Between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, earned $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation, according to a Common Cause review of the foundation's IRS records. Thomas failed to note the income in his Supreme Court financial disclosure forms for those years, instead checking a box labeled "none" where "spousal noninvestment income" would be disclosed.
A Supreme Court spokesperson could not be reached for comment late Friday. But Virginia Thomas' employment by the Heritage Foundation was well known at the time.
Virginia Thomas also has been active in the group Liberty Central, <u>an organization she founded to restore the "founding principles" of limited government and individual liberty.</u><span style="color: #990000">Mmmmmm...where have I heard that before?</span>
In his 2009 disclosure, Justice Thomas also reported spousal income as "none." Common Cause contends that Liberty Central paid Virginia Thomas an unknown salary that year.
Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas' omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.
"<u>It wasn't a miscalculation; he simply omitted his wife's source of income for six years,</u> which is a rather dramatic omission," Gillers said. "It could not have been an oversight." </div></div>
Bought and paid for.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In the case, <u>Citizens United </u>vs. Federal Election Commission, the court ruled that corporate and union funds could be spent directly on election advertising.
The Koch brothers have been key supporters of the group Americans for Prosperity, which spent heavily in the 2010 midterm election and claims a nonprofit tax status that allows it to avoid disclosing its donors.
<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Clarence Thomas has been the lone justice to argue that laws requiring public disclosure of large political contributions are unconstitutional.</span>
A Supreme Court spokesperson later said that Thomas dropped by the private event, but that Scalia did not attend. </div></div>
This all part of a RW strategy.
' If we can't change the law ,change the judges.'
Q link (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-thomas-disclosure-20110122,0,2413407.story)