Leading conservative donor Harlan Crow, whose company often litigates in federal court, provided $500,000 to allow Thomas’s wife to start a Tea Party group and he once gave Thomas a $19,000 Bible [ http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1231-04.htm ] that belonged to Frederick Douglass. The American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank which frequently files briefs in Thomas’ Court, also gave Thomas a $15,000 gift.
If this sounds familiar, it’s because America has seen this movie before. Indeed, the Thomas scandal is little more than a remake of the forty year-old gifting scandal that brought down Justice Abe Fortas. Like Thomas, Fortas liked to associate with wealthy individuals with potential business before his Court. And like Thomas, Fortas took inappropriate gifts from his wealthy benefactors.
Fortas’ questionable gifts first came out when President Johnson nominated him for a promotion to Chief Justice of the United States in 1968. Fortas had accepted $15,000 to lead seminars at American University — far more than the university normally paid for such services — and the payments were bankrolled by the leaders of frequent corporate litigants [ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7747167/ns/politics-tom_curry/ ] including the vice president of Phillip Morris. Fortas survived this revelation, although his nomination for the Chief Justiceship was filibustered into oblivion.
Just a year later, the country learned that Fortas took another highly questionable gift. In 1966, one year after Fortas joined the Court, stock speculator Louis E. Wolfson’s foundation began paying Fortas an annual retainer of $20,000 per year for consulting services. Fortas’ actions were legal, and he eventually returned the money [ http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/us/02wolfson.html ] after Wolfson was convicted of securities violations and recused himself from Wolfson’s case, but the damage to Fortas — and the potential harm to the Supreme Court’s reputation — were too great. Fortas resigned in disgrace.
It is difficult to distinguish Fortas’ scandal from Thomas’. Like Fortas, Thomas accepted several very valuable gifts from parties who are frequently interested in the outcome of federal court cases. One of Thomas’ benefactors has even filed briefs [ http://www.aei.org/speech/26853 ] in his Court since giving Thomas a $15,000 gift, and Thomas has not recused himself [ http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-666.ZS.html ] from each of these cases.
But Thomas’ disregard for what has come before him changes nothing about the precedent he faces. If Abe Fortas had to resign his seat, so too should Clarence Thomas.
Ian Millhiser, attorney, policy analyst and blogger for the Center for American Progress, talks with Rachel Maddow about the revelations of, and possible consequences for, Justice Clarence Thomas' apparent conflicts of interest.
OT: Searched for pets and came up with your "ethics", so it kinda fits .. :)
THE UN human rights chief today called for financing, saying that her office was being "stretched to breaking point" as funds were not keeping pace with soaring demand for human rights work.
"With the momentous events taking place in the Middle East and North Africa, it has been striking, and heartening, to see how much attention is being given to human rights across the world," said Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
"Yet, when I look at the amount of money being invested in human rights, I start to wonder how deep the commitment goes," she added.
Of the total budget of $4.8 billion allotted to the UN secretariat, only 2.8 per cent or about $66.28 million is given to human rights in 2011.
With commissions of inquiries ordered by the Human Rights Council to Libya, Ivory Coast and Syria, as well as a slew of resolutions passed during the last session of the council, the office would need $141 million worth of voluntary contributions on top of the UN allocation this year.
However, donors are only ready to give between $98.72 million and $103.42 million, said Pillay.
Pointing out that her office's annual budget is "the same amount as Australians spend on Easter eggs", the UN's top official on human rights urged states to invest more in human rights.
"The amount Europeans spent on their pets in 2010 alone - $53.4 billion - would fund the entire UN human rights system, including my office, for something like 250 years," she noted.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
