11x01 - U.S. Supreme Court

[bunniefuu]

Welcome to "Last Week Tonight!"

I'm John Oliver!

Thank you so much for joining us.

We are back!

And we have missed a lot

in the last two months,

from Ron DeSantis

ending his campaign,

to Nikki Haley

losing the Nevada primary

to "none of these candidates".

But the story

I'm most sad to have missed

concerned the sudden mania

around a hole shaped like a rat

on a Chicago street,

or "rat hole" as it became known.

Which probably peaked

with this.

You knew it was inevitable,

a Chicago rat hole wedding.

Wedding bells on Saturday

at what's become Chicago's

hottest tourist attraction:

the Chicago rat hole.

Raj and his partner looked

at a lot of Chicago landmarks

for their wedding,

until nine days ago,

when he saw the story

of the Chicago rat hole.

We were viewing a lot

of different venues,

a lot of different

big monuments in Chicago,

and finally, we looked at each other

and we were like

"Let's get married

at the rat hole".

Yes!

Say what you will,

that marriage is gonna last forever.

Nothing says a relationship is solid

like waiting until nine f*cking days

before your wedding to pick a venue,

then looking into each other's eyes

and both saying

"Let's get married at the rat hole".

That is true love right there.

The hole's emergence

as a tourist attraction

became a bit of a nuisance

for neighbors, though,

which may explain why, shortly

before that wedding, this happened.

At some point today or yesterday,

someone filled in Chicago's

most famous concrete attraction.

What were your feelings

when you came to the rat hole

and you saw it was filled in

with concrete?

I don't understand why everyone's

trying to block our good time.

Exactly! She's right. Let us enjoy

one thing. Just one thing!

Filling in the rat hole

is a grave injustice,

both figuratively

and literally.

I'd love to spend this entire episode

talking about rat holes.

God knows I've done it before.

But there's more to catch up on.

In Russia, Putin has been busy.

One of his most prominent critics,

Alexei Navalny,

d*ed in a Siberian prison this week,

for reasons

any idiot can figure out.

Making it a bit awkward that last week,

noted idiot Tucker Carlson

sat down with Putin

for a fawning interview,

in which he failed

to meaningfully challenge him.

Tucker was so docile,

even Putin later made fun of him.

I thought he'd be aggressive,

asking these so-called sharp questions.

I wasn't simply ready for it,

I wanted it.

Because it would give me

a chance to respond equally sharply,

which, in my view, would give

specificity to our entire conversation.

But he chose a different tactic.

Frankly speaking, I didn't get

complete pleasure from this interview.

There's embarrassing,

and there's "getting roasted by Putin

for being a lap dog" embarrassing.

Also, why on Earth did he think

there'd be sharp questions?

If whoever prepped Putin for that

interview said anything other than

"You're about to talk

to the dumbest Brooks brother,

so feel free to take a nap,

they should be fired."

Meanwhile, in the Middle East,

Israel continued its as*ault on Gaza,

with over 28,000 Palestinians now dead,

most of them women and children.

This week saw att*cks in Rafah,

the city that stands

as the last refuge for Gazan civilians.

And yet, the U.S. refuses

to curtail m*llitary aid to Israel,

instead offering tepid rebukes,

like Biden saying Israel's actions

are "over the top",

while the White House

leaks that privately,

the president's very upset.

Part of what the president is saying,

according to people who've heard him

make these comments,

is that Netanyahu is, quote,

"giving him hell",

that he's impossible

to deal with.

We're also told on three,

at least three instances,

the president referred to Netanyahu

as an A-hole.

Careful there, Joe.

What if Bibi hears you?

Nothing shames the guy comfortable

with bombing hospitals

and refugee camps

like knowing that 6,000 miles away,

an 81-year-old

is muttering PG-13 words

under his breath.

Next, Biden is going to whisper

"what a d*ck" into a seashell

and toss it into the ocean?

Biden has reportedly said much worse,

which American TV danced around,

but Arabic-language Al Jazeera

delivered the quote in full.

And we're not going

to translate this for you,

but you'll know the phrase

when you hear it.

…bad f*cking guy.

Yeah!

Biden apparently called Netanyahu

"a bad f*cking guy".

You should be allowed to say that about

Netanyahu uncensored on American TV.

Because I guarantee,

it's coming out the mouths of Gazans

and the families of the hostages

nonstop right now.

The president's likely opponent

in November has been taking a break

between court dates and accumulating

massive financial penalties

to offer his own plans

for international relations.

First saying that if NATO members

don't "pay their bills",

which isn't a thing,

he'd encourage Russia to

"do whatever the hell they want".

Then he suggested aid to Ukraine

should actually be a loan,

then got distracted, then distracted

again from his original distraction.

Why should you just

hand it over to 'em?

Do it as a form of a loan.

I do that with athletes,

like a professional golfer

who I think is very good,

they don't have any money,

but they have a lot of talent.

I'll say, here's the deal,

I did it with a number of people,

here's the deal, what I wanna do,

professional golfer, play golf,

I play very nice.

Did you see the picture of me

with the stomach out to here?

So what I do is, I'm putting up today

a picture of me, actually,

what I actually look like, hitting

a ball, smashing the fricking ball,

and you'll see, quite…

I wouldn't say slim.

I wouldn't say slim. But not bad.

But the ball does go far.

I would say it goes about nine times

further than Biden can hit it.

What? I haven't watched Tr*mp

speak in so long,

I forgot how jam-packed

with nonsense every sentence is.

It's the little details,

like the way he suddenly yelled,

"hand! it over to them",

as if a ghost jabbed him

in the ribs mid-sentence.

I don't want to be overdramatic,

but the idea of watching clips of him

talking every week for the next year

makes me want to book a trip

on the next Titan submersible.

And I know no one watching this

needs a reminder

that we have a long,

grim election year ahead of us.

But keep in mind, it's only February.

We need to pace ourselves,

or we're going to get b*rned out,

and want to crawl into a small hole

and wait for it to be over.

Though I will say,

if that does happen,

I know a pretty good hole in Chicago

that's apparently available.

And now, this!

And now, Chuck Grassley

Celebrates His Favorite Holiday.

Unfortunately, this is a little bit

like the movie "Groundhog's Day".

Some days,

constituent correspondence

may seem like the movie

"Groundhog Day".

Immigration is becoming

the "Groundhog Day"

of the United States Senate.

So, it's kind of "Groundhog Day"

once again.

Yesterday,

we also had Groundhog's Day.

My first chart

is a depiction of Punxsutawney Phil.

In the past, I have compared

this constant repetition

to a film called "Groundhog Day"

starring Bill Murray,

where Bill Murray's character relives

the same day over and over again.

Next to me is this chart

from the movie "Groundhog Day".

"Groundhog Day" is also the title

of a famous film starring Bill Murray.

So, I have another picture for you

of Phil and Bill driving along.

Moving on.

Our main story tonight

concerns the courts,

the dignified palaces of justice

which, during Covid,

brought us

spectacular moments like this.

Mr. Ponton, I believe you have a filter

turned on in the video settings.

It is, and I don't know

how to remove it.

I've got my assistant here,

she's trying to,

but I'm prepared

to go forward with it.

I'm here live,

I'm not a cat.

Perfect. You know a hearing's off

to a shaky start

when a lawyer has to clarify

that he is "not a cat".

And I did not want him

to "un-cat" himself there.

I wanted that man

to spend the rest of the hearing

as a photo-realistic kitten looking

like he witnessed a double homicide.

We're going to talk

about the Supreme Court,

which is set to have

a monumental year.

Not only will it take on cases

concerning the availability

of Mifepristone,

and whether Tr*mp's immune

from prosecution

for his role in January 6th,

it's also considering one case

centering on something

called "Chevron deference".

It sounds like the title of a spy novel

that you'd burn through at an airport,

but it's a vitally important

legal precedent

that says that when there is ambiguity

in the letter of a law,

courts should defer

to regulatory agencies' expertise.

Do you like it when the EPA

regulates pollution,

or the FDA regulates dr*gs?

Much of their ability to do that

comes from Chevron deference.

And if the court guts it,

it'll be much easier

for private industries

to block government regulation.

So, this is gonna be a huge year

for a court that has seldom been

more powerful.

And yet, respect for it

has seldom been lower.

The court's public approval rating

has dropped to a 50-year low,

with just 18%

expressing great confidence.

It's true.

And it's hard to think of anything

people have less confidence in

right now,

aside from maybe the window seats

in Boeing planes.

And there are understandable

reasons for that,

from the unpopular decision

overturning Roe v. Wade

to the fact that one-third

of the court was appointed,

sometimes under

dubious circumstances,

by a man who never won

the popular vote.

But the past year

has also introduced us to

a whole new reason

to question the court's integrity,

thanks to a steady drumbeat

of stories like these.

Supreme Court

Justice Clarence Thomas

is facing new allegations he accepted

luxurious vacations and gifts

from wealthy individuals

and didn't properly disclose them.

Politico reported

Justice Neil Gorsuch

sold property he owned

to the head of a major law firm.

Justice Samuel Alito

defended himself

after he didn't report a luxury trip

to Alaska and a private jet flight.

The report details

that in July of that year,

they stayed at the King Salmon Lodge

and were served multi-course meals

of Alaskan king crab legs

or Kobe filet.

They also enjoyed wine

that cost $1,000 a bottle.

Alito denies he did anything wrong,

and specifically said

"If there was wine, it was certainly

not wine that costs $1,000".

Which I hope is true

for multiple reasons,

namely, that wine

should never cost $1,000

because wine

is not that good a drink.

Think about the words

people use to describe good wine.

Complex? That's just

a fancy word for confusing.

Earthy?

That's literally dirt flavor.

And smooth?

Your best compliment is that

it didn't fight you on the way down?

It's a bad drink!

But the cost of the wine,

which, again, should be zero,

isn't the point here.

Stories like those have further

undermined public trust in the court,

which is a big problem.

Because it's an institution

that relies on respect.

It can't enforce its own rulings.

And without public buy-in,

it could theoretically be ignored.

Chief Justice Roberts himself

recently wrote:

"Public trust is essential,

not incidental, to our function".

These scandals

are a huge issue for it.

Given that, we'd thought we'd look

at how deep this court's problems go,

and a possible solution

that might go one-ninth of the way

towards helping things get better.

And let's start

with a striking fact.

When it comes to what ethical rules

the court is required to follow,

there basically aren't any.

Congress can impeach a justice

in extreme scenarios,

but short of that, the court

essentially regulates itself.

And that has happened

in the past.

In the '60s, Justice Abe Fortas

was involved in a number of scandals,

including taking money

to advise a businessman

who wound up having

a case before the court.

But despite the fact that getting paid

for outside work was legal,

and that Fortas both returned the money

and recused himself from the case,

the mere appearance of impropriety

caused lawmakers of both parties

to call for his resignation.

He stepped down, saying that he was

doing so "for the good of the court".

And just a few weeks later,

the U.S. judicial conference

unveiled a new ethics policy

for federal judges.

With one tiny exception.

See if you can spot it.

The United States judicial,

judicial conference

today issued a code of ethics

which forbids all federal judges,

except Supreme Court justices,

from accepting fees, gifts,

or compensation of any kind

for off-bench activities.

The Supreme Court justices

were exempt.

That new rule solved every problem

except for the one they just had.

And there've been multiple tweaks

to the code of ethics over the years,

with the one constant being

that the Supreme Court justices

are not covered by it.

And even laws that apply to them

are basically unenforceable.

The argument is that because

they are the highest court in the land,

there's no one they can answer to.

Over the years,

the justices have noted that they

voluntarily follow certain rules.

They're required to report

any gifts worth more than $480.

That is how we learned

about Ruth Bader Ginsburg

receiving a $4,500 opera costume,

Ketanji Brown Jackson

receiving a floral arrangement

from Oprah worth $1,200,

and Antonin Scalia

receiving "two firearms

and $950 worth of dictionaries".

Which is slightly weirdly phrased.

Because "$950 worth of dictionaries"

could either mean one very luxurious

dictionary or 120 regular ones.

But while those gifts were disclosed,

others haven't been.

Scalia had a habit of not disclosing

trips that other people paid for,

and d*ed while staying for free

at the hunting lodge

of a business executive

whose company had recently

had a case before the court.

And I bet that executive

was very glad he got the ruling

before that fun-sounding visit.

And as you've already seen,

some justices

have run with that precedent.

Remember Alito's fishing trip?

When it came to light,

he said that he didn't think

the rules required disclosing it,

and attempted to justify

the free private jet flight

with a laughable argument.

Alito explaining

that on that private jet flight,

he was in "what would otherwise

have been an unoccupied seat".

Come on!

Alito's considered one of the sharpest

conservative legal minds,

and that's the best he's got?

If you hadn't been in the seat,

it would've been empty, Samuel.

That's not so much

a defense of your behavior

as it is an explanation

of how seats work.

Also, it's a private jet.

All the seats are otherwise unoccupied.

They don't overbook them

like it's the 5:05 Spirit Airlines

flight from Myrtle Beach to Vegas.

And that feels ethically dicey,

even before you learn

that one of his hosts on that trip

was a hedge fund manager

whose companies have since

had 10 cases before the court.

And that's not a one-off.

For years, Neil Gorsuch

had been trying unsuccessfully

to sell a 40-acre piece of property

that he co-owned in Colorado.

But coincidentally, just

"nine days after he was confirmed",

he managed to sell it.

And while he did disclose

that sale,

he left the identity of the purchaser

blank on the form,

which isn't great,

'cause it turned out to be

"the chief executive of one

of the nation's biggest law firms",

which has since been involved

in at least 22 Supreme Court cases.

And if you're wondering

what that weird sound is right now,

I'm pretty sure

it's the ghost of Abe Fortas going:

"Are you kidding me?

Are you kidding me?"

But the biggest offender on the court

is unquestionably Clarence Thomas.

If you're unfamiliar with his work,

I envy you.

But very quickly,

he's an extreme originalist,

known for adopting

hard-right positions

years before other

justices come around to them,

from overturning g*n laws,

to undermining the Voting Rights Act.

He's also questioned whether

poor people have a right to a lawyer,

saying the constitution only guarantees

you the right to hire a lawyer,

not to have one provided for you.

And he once said

that Black civil rights leaders

"bitch, bitch, bitch, moan and moan,

whine and whine".

And sure, why can't the people

fighting for basic equality

just have the chill,

good-time vibes

that we all associate

with Clarence f*cking Thomas?

He's so fun to be around!

Ask almost any woman

who's ever worked for him!

For years, there have been stories

about Thomas accepting lavish gifts.

But things escalated recently with

a series of ProPublica investigations

revealing Thomas' relationship with

these four conservative billionaires.

The report says the four moguls

collectively treated Thomas

to 38 destination vacations,

26 private jet flights,

plus an additional

eight by helicopter,

a dozen VIP passes to professional

and college sporting events,

two stays at luxury resorts

in Florida and Jamaica,

and one standing invitation

to an uber-exclusive golf club,

the dollar value

likely in the millions.

Just one of those vacations

was a nine-day Indonesian

superyacht voyage that,

if he'd paid for it himself,

could have exceeded

over half a million dollars.

And the way ProPublica tracked down

some of those trips is pretty great.

The host of that Indonesian vacation,

and multiple others,

was Harlan Crow,

a billionaire who "has given millions

to efforts to move the law

and the judiciary to the right".

Crow liked to give out

commemorative polo shirts

for the trips

that he took people on.

ProPublica started looking at the shirts

Thomas was wearing in photos,

which helped them

uncover some of these trips.

Journalism is a crapshoot.

Sometimes, you spend weeks

hunting down leads,

painstakingly building a timeline.

Other times, your target just posts

a photo of himself on Facebook

wearing a T-shirt that says "Secret

Undeclared Yacht Vacation 2003"

and gives the whole game away.

Those reporters

also tracked down photos and cards

that Thomas' wife, Ginni, sent to

friends to commemorate their trips,

with fun captions like "Five couples

ready for river rafting!"

"The Sokols took four lucky couples

to the first Nebraska footbal",

misspelled, "game of the season",

and this photo of a Tr*mp

administration attorney and his wife

captioned "Mark and Tricia Paoletta

sang a special tribute

to Clarence they created!"

And every single one of those photos

looks like it was on the mood board

for "Get Out".

But wait,

'cause I'm still not done!

They also found

this photorealistic painting

that Harlan Crow commissioned of one

of those vacations featuring him,

Thomas, Leonard Leo,

of the conservative Federalist Society,

and a statue

of a Native American man

seemingly praying for lightning

to strike this exact spot.

But if you're thinking that that is the

worst piece of art Harlan Crow owns,

you are mistaken.

Published reports say Dallas tycoon

Harlan Crow's controversial collection

includes h*tler's notorious

autobiography "Mein Kampf"

signed by h*tler,

oil paintings by h*tler,

and linen napkins

embroidered with the n*zi swastika.

The collection is housed

at Crow's mansion in Dallas.

"I can't get over the collection

of n*zi memorabilia",

said one guest,

who saw the n*zi treasure trove.

"You sort of just gasp

when you walk into the room".

Yeah, I bet you do!

Because that is a bit of a red flag!

Specifically, this red flag!

Crow says his controversial artifacts

are part of a collection meant

to "preserve a part of our history",

and "to understand

how we all got here".

And I'm guessing

his guests ask that exact question

when they see his signed copy

of "Mein Kampf" for the first time.

"How the f*ck did I get here?"

Though, bad news for Harlan about

at least one of his h*tler paintings,

an expert has since deemed it

definitely not authentic.

Which I guess he probably should've

seen coming as it was signed

"A. h*tler" and not "The h*tler".

Crow's also repeatedly

flown Thomas out on his jet

for trips to the Bohemian Grove,

the California retreat

for the rich and powerful

where he and the Koch brothers

apparently developed a bond.

Here is Thomas with one

of them and Ken Burns,

for some f*cking reason.

Thomas has also, incidentally,

"attended Koch donor events"

at least twice,

serving as "a fundraising draw"

for an organization that regularly

brings cases before the court.

His excuse

for not reporting any of this

was that he "sought guidance

from my colleagues and others,

and was advised that this sort

of personal hospitality

from close personal friends

was not reportable."

And while it is true

the judicial guidelines

have an exception

for personal hospitality,

experts will point out,

that means dinner at someone's house,

not a nine-day-all-

expenses-paid yacht trip.

A pretty good rule of thumb is,

if it could be a prize

on "The Price is Right",

it's not personal hospitality.

And Thomas has received

more than just hospitality anyway.

In 2014,

one of Harlan Crow's companies

bought a string of properties

in Savannah

including Thomas' childhood home

where his mother still lives.

Crow also reportedly

paid for two years of private school

for Thomas' grand-nephew,

who apparently Thomas

has raised as a son,

and which, based on the tuition rates

at the time,

amounted to roughly $100,000.

Neither of those

were disclosed at the time either.

And it gets pretty hard to square

the lavish vacations,

the real estate, the tuition,

with Thomas' insistence that he's an

iconoclastic voice for the little guy,

in appearances like this one

from two years ago,

where he thanked

the people who'd shown up

to support him

during his 1991 confirmation hearing.

The regular people showed up.

And it was always

us against the elites.

And that's the way

it has been

for the last 40-plus years

I've been in public life.

Us against the elites.

I get it!

So, the 38 destination vacations

were just part of your

"us versus the elites" plot, right?

Lull them into a false

sense of security,

then presumably,

on the 39th vacation,

vive la révolution!

I love it! What a plan!

But that sounds like horseshit

even before you see

that this is how that talk started.

I'm sure you and all of us

want to join Harlan…

thank Harlan Crow

and his family

for making this wonderful facility

available to us.

I know Harlan hates that.

I knew we had to…

That's why I wouldn't say it.

I'd like to keep that friendship.

I bet you would!

I'm sure friendship

is the thing that you like the most

about knowing Harlan Crow.

Not the lavish yacht trips,

or the private jet flights,

the simple human companionship

of an aging n*zi napkin collector.

But perhaps the item

that perfectly sums up

the distance between Thomas'

regular-guy persona

and his high-end tastes

is his motor home.

It is his prize possession.

He even showed it off during

his "60 Minutes" interview.

One of his passions

is this 40-foot-long motor home

that he and his wife use to explore

the United States in their downtime.

- Do you find this relaxing?

- Yeah!

It's away from the meanness

that you see in Washington,

and you get here

with just the regular folks.

And it's so pleasant.

I can see that. People in Washington

can be so mean, can't they?

I've heard some even make decisions

in landmark court cases

that loosen g*n regulations,

limit affirmative action,

and strip women of their constitutional

right to an abortion,

so I get the impulse

to want to get outta town

to avoid those f*cking sociopaths.

Thomas loves his motor

home so much,

he can be a bit of a snob

if asked inaccurately about it.

One of you enjoys

traveling cross-country

with your spouse

in a 40-foot RV.

- Who's that?

- That's technically incorrect.

- Is it not an RV?

- It is a motor coach.

- Is that bigger than an RV?

- It could be…

But it is a better vehicle

than an RV.

An RV is normally built

on a light truck chassis.

A motor coach is a tour bus.

I mean, it's old,

but it's really nice.

Honestly, if Thomas hadn't caused

so much human misery,

him liking big comfy trucks

that go vroom-vroom

would be genuinely charming.

Every man in his 70s

has picked a vehicle

that occupies way too much space

in his brain and heart.

Some like trains that go choo-choo.

Some like boats that go glub-glub.

And others love motor coaches,

based on a non-light-truck chassis.

I'm not saying these men love their

vehicles more than their families.

It's just, it's easier for them to say

"I prefer O scale trains

because historically,

that's what this country's finest model

trains have been since the 1800's,"

than "I'm proud of you, son".

But about that bus.

It is apparently

"the Rolls-Royce of motor coaches:

a custom Prevost Marathon",

or as Thomas himself once put it,

a "condo on wheels".

And if you're thinking

"That's a pretty big purchase

for a Supreme Court justice

to be able to afford" about that…

Supreme Court Justice

Clarence Thomas

has been an RV evangelist

for decades,

traveling the country

in a 40-foot luxury motor coach

that he purchased in 1999

after borrowing more than

a quarter of a million dollars

from a wealthy friend.

But a new report from Democrats

on the Senate Finance Committee

alleges Thomas' friend

forgave a substantial amount

of that massive loan.

And nine years later,

his friend forgave all the debt.

That sounds like a sweet deal!

It's starting to feel like Thomas

doesn't so much have friends

as a collection of human ATMs.

And his wealthy friends

will say there is nothing to see here.

They're just doing for Clarence

what they would do for anyone else.

Harlan Crow

pulled that exact move.

In a statement, Harlan Crow,

the Dallas real estate billionaire

who picks up the tabs for the trips,

says he and Thomas

have been friends since 1996.

"The hospitality we have extended

to the Thomases over the years

is no different from the hospitality

we have extended

to our many other dear friends".

Okay, but it is different, though.

While you may have been friends

with Clarence Thomas for a long time,

you didn't start

being friends with him

until five years after he was made

a Supreme Court justice.

Each of his four major benefactors

appears to have first met Thomas

after he ascended

to the Supreme Court.

Which is inherently telling.

Even socially inept high schoolers

can figure that out.

If Brenna, Jackson, and Ashton

only start hanging out with you

after you get a job at Coldstone,

it's not about you,

it's about the free f*cking scoops.

And thankfully, there is a way

for a justice to avoid the appearance

of impropriety, and that is recusal.

Any justice is required

to disqualify themselves

in any proceeding

where their impartiality

might reasonably be questioned.

But, as with everything else

you've seen tonight,

for the Supreme Court,

it's essentially just a suggestion.

The justices themselves decide

if they are able to be impartial,

and those decisions

cannot then be appealed.

Even when it comes to recusals,

Thomas is an outlier.

He almost never recuses,

even when he clearly should.

Take one recent case where he had

a flagrant conflict of interest,

albeit not a financial one.

Because the court recently

took up a number of appeals

involving cases

surrounding January 6th.

And as it happens, a major cheerleader

to overturn Biden's win

was Thomas' own wife, Ginni,

as her texts

to then-White House chief of staff

Mark Meadows show.

In one, Thomas writing, quote:

"Help this great president

stand firm, Mark!

Biden and the left is attempting

the greatest heist of our history".

And in another,

just days the 2020 election,

Thomas writing

"Do not concede".

On November 24th,

Meadows wrote Thomas:

"This is a fight

of good versus evil".

Thomas replied

"Thank you! Needed that!

This plus a conversation

with my best friend just now."

Ginni Thomas

looks exactly like a person

who would try to speak to the

manager about a presidential election.

But, despite that "conversation

with my best friend" line,

Ginni insists she never talked to her

husband about the election challenges.

Which is a bit weird,

because he says this a lot.

It's a particular honor

to be here with my wife, Virginia,

who is totally my best friend

in the world.

I love to spend time with my wife,

who's my best friend in the world.

I love being here

with my bride, Virginia,

who's a gift from God and

my best friend in the whole world.

Okay, first,

if Ginni is indeed "a gift from God",

I guess it's nice

that Clarence Thomas

got at least one gift from someone

who is not a billionaire.

But also, it'd seem

that either Ginni Thomas

was keeping her husband up to date

on her ongoing coup attempt,

or she's Clarence's best friend

but he isn't hers.

And that is rough. There's going to be

a lot of awkward silences

on their next motor coach trip.

But the fact is, a justice's wife

inserted herself into efforts

to overturn the last election.

Yet, in multiple cases

involving January 6th,

Thomas didn't recuse himself,

even in one concerning

whether White House files,

which could have contained

more of Ginni's texts,

had to be handed over

to the January 6th committee.

Thomas was the lone dissenter

saying that they should remain secret.

And if that is not

a conflict of interest,

I honestly don't know

what one is.

The fundamental corruption here

might be bigger than anything

one recusal could cover.

Because I'm not saying that Thomas

is only voting the way he is

because of the trips and the gifts.

His opinions were horrible

before he ever set foot on a yacht.

That doesn't mean those billionaires

haven't had a real impact on him.

Because, for years,

Thomas repeatedly talked about money.

In the 1980s, he told a reporter

he planned to be rich,

and said that means

"more than just a few

hundred thousand dollars a year".

But unfortunately for him,

that's exactly what being

a Supreme Court justice pays,

just under $300,000.

And he's been pretty vocal

about his dissatisfaction with that,

sometimes even publicly.

The job is not worth doing

for what they pay.

It's not worth doing

for the grief,

but it is worth doing

for the principle.

You sure about that?

'Cause your job is writing opinions

in a bathrobe and it pays six figures.

Most bloggers do that for free,

and they don't get to enjoy

seeing their worst takes

becoming everyone else's law.

It was right around that time,

in the early aughts,

that Thomas reportedly said to

a Republican member of Congress

that, unless it gave Supreme Court

justices a pay raise, quote,

"One or more will leave soon.

Maybe in the next year".

That set off alarm bells

in conservative quarters.

As that lawmaker Thomas

spoke to recalls it

"His importance as a conservative

was paramount.

We wanted to make sure

he felt comfortable in his job

and he was being paid properly."

Unfortunately, for Thomas,

justices' salaries haven't been raised

beyond inflation since then.

But it may not be a coincidence

that a handful of billionaires

have suddenly stepped in

to make sure that Thomas

was never anything less

than extremely comfortable.

And in recent years, he's seemed

much less worried about his paycheck.

Right now, what is the compensation

of a justice of the Supreme Court?

Goodness, I think it's plenty.

It's not quite where you are,

but it's…

I have no…

My wife and I are doing fine.

We don't live extravagantly,

but we are fine.

Here's a fun fact for you:

that was in early June of 2019.

Guess where he was

at the end of that month?

On Harlan Crow's

Indonesian yacht trip.

That is the comfortable laugh of a man

looking forward to a free trip

and, fingers crossed,

a free shirt to go with it.

Basically, what I'm suggesting is,

it's not that these billionaires have

paid Thomas to change his views.

It's that they like his views,

so they're paying for him not to leave.

Which is different, but not better.

And if that was their plan,

it has worked.

Thomas is at the heart of the new

conservative supermajority on the court

and has plans to go further.

In his concurrence in the Dobbs case,

he said the court should reconsider

previous erroneous rulings on sodomy,

birth control, and gay marriage.

And despite being known

for the consistency of his views,

there is one key issue

on which he's evolved.

Because remember that Chevron

deference that I mentioned earlier?

20 years ago,

Thomas wrote a majority opinion

that expanded

Chevron's protections.

But since then,

there's been a massive conservative

push to get rid of Chevron,

led by the Koch Organization,

you know, Clarence's vacation friends.

And a few years ago, Thomas

renounced his earlier decision,

writing that he'd determined that the

doctrine is unconstitutional after all.

What caused that change of heart?

I don't know.

Was it 15 years of marinating

in right-wing money, and vacationing

with businessmen who could massively

profit from it being overturned?

We can't say for sure. But we can

all think it together, can't we?

Ready? Let's do that. One, two, three,

yes, it's because of the money.

sh*t, sorry, I thought it so hard

it came out of my mouth.

I know we focused a lot

on Clarence Thomas tonight,

but this story

isn't just about his integrity.

It's about the court's.

From the beginning, America,

like most countries,

was built on polite fictions,

by men who could somehow

hold in their heads

the idea that all men

were created equal,

at the same time that they were drawing

up the Three-Fifths Compromise.

And while we've shed

a lot of those fictions,

we still cling to the idea

of the Supreme Court

as a body separate

and apart from politics.

It retains a certain amount

of mystique and ceremony.

We put the justices on a pedestal,

and let them wear robes like wizards.

In their confirmation hearings,

they pretend to have no idea

how they'll rule on hot-button issues,

and we all have to pretend

to believe them

before we appoint them to a job

that they can hold until they die.

We don't treat them

like what they are, which is people,

who can be motivated by ideology

and greed, like anybody else.

But polite fictions can only be bent

so far before they break.

And right now, it feels like the

Supreme Court is at a breaking point.

And there are small ways to fix that,

from a real, enforceable ethics code,

to term limits, to even potentially

expanding the court.

And honestly, if it were up to me,

they'd also be dressed not in robes,

but as Walmart greeters,

to emphasize they're not magic,

they're humans, like everyone else.

But if we're not going to do

any of that,

if we're going to keep

the bar of accountability this low,

perhaps it's time

to exploit that low bar

the same way billionaires

have successfully done for decades.

And that finally brings us

to the solution that I mentioned

at the start of this piece.

Clarence Thomas is arguably the most

consequential justice on the court.

And he's never really

seemed to like the job.

He's said it's not worth doing

"for the grief".

So, what if he could keep the luxury

perks that he clearly enjoys,

without having to endure

all of that grief?

I think there might actually

be a way to do that.

Because, Justice Thomas, we have

a special offer for you tonight.

We are prepared to offer you

$1 million a year,

for the rest of your life,

if you simply agree

to leave the Supreme Court immediately

and never come back.

It is that simple.

Just sign this contract, resign,

and the money is all yours!

This is not a joke.

If you watch our show,

you know jokes aren't really our thing.

This is real. A million dollars a year,

until you or I die.

We have spoken to experts

who've all told us that,

best they can tell,

this is somehow legal.

Which seems crazy to me, 'cause

it really feels like it shouldn't be.

But as they keep pointing out,

there are no rules in place

to stop me from doing this.

And let me be clear, HBO is not

putting up the money for this.

I am personally on the hook.

You could make me really regret this!

I could be doing standup tours

to pay for your retirement for years.

But this offer is not forever.

You have 30 days from midnight tonight

to make your resignation effective.

And if you are still on the fence,

I have a little deal sweetener

that I'm excited to show you,

so please come with me.

Come this way!

We know you've got a lot

on your plate right now,

from stripping away women's rights,

to hearing January 6th cases

you definitely shouldn't be hearing,

to potentially helping roll back

decades of federal regulations.

And you deserve a break. Away

from the "meanness of Washington",

so you can be surrounded

by the "regular folks"

whose lives you've made

demonstrably worse for decades now.

And the good news is,

I think we can help you there.

Since your favorite mode of travel

might be in need of an upgrade,

we are excited to offer you…

This brand new, top-of-the-line

Prevost Marathon motor coach.

Look at this beauty, Clarence!

It's worth $2.4 million,

and it's got a full bedroom,

yes, that is a king bed,

one and a half baths,

a f*cking fireplace, four TVs,

a washer-dryer,

and I quote,

a "residential-sized fridge".

And if you're thinking

"What will my friends say

if I take this offer?

Will they judge me,

as they sit in their boardrooms

and mega yachts and h*tler shrines?"

"Will they still treat me

to luxury vacations,

and sing songs about me

off their phones?"

That's the beauty of friendship,

Clarence.

If they're friends, they'll love you

no matter what your job is.

So, I guess, this might be

the perfect way to find out

who your real friends

actually are.

So, that's the offer,

a million dollars a year, Clarence,

and a brand-new

"condo on wheels".

All you have to do in return

is sign the contract

and get the f*ck off the Supreme Court.

Talk it over with your totally

best friend in the whole world,

because the clock starts now!

30 days, Clarence!

Let's do this!

That's our show,

thank you so much for watching.

We'll see you next week,

good night!

How is this legal?

Your move, Clarence.

Your f*cking move!