House Democrat to seek transparency of Supreme Court conflicts of interest

Rep. Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.) said Wednesday he would introduce legislation after next week's break that would require Supreme Court justices to publicly disclose why they have recused themselves from cases. Murphy said the bill would also require the Supreme Court to develop a process that would allow parties to a case to "request the court to decide whether a particular justice has a conflict of interest."

Murphy said his bill is needed in light of reports he said suggest Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas might have had a conflict of interest in the Citizens United case. Republicans have said this decision rightly ended a government ban on independent political spending by companies and unions and prevents the government from deciding which entities can "speak" through spending in the political process.

Democrats have argued that decision allowed corporations to flood Republican campaign coffers with unregulated money, and Murphy reiterated that charge Wednesday. Immediately after the decision, "millions and millions of dollars of shadowy special interest group [money] flowed into American campaigns," he said.

Murphy charged that because Scalia and Thomas attended a conference with two Kansas businessmen who benefitted from the Citizens United case, and because this happened while the case was before the court, this is a possible conflict of interest.

"This nation's confidence in the blind justice of the Supreme Court has been badly shaken recently by a series of revelations regarding possible conflicts of interest by Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas in the Citizens United case," Murphy said. Murphy's argument appears to be based on complaints by Common Cause, which has made identical charges.

While conservatives have rejected these arguments, Murphy said the two justices attended the conference, "and they thought it was just fine. They didn't recuse themselves from the Citizens United decision at all."

Murphy said a proposal to require "sunlight" on Supreme Court proceedings is "no undue burden" and urged other members to support his bill when it is introduced.