Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni Thomas have been all over the news lately, and not in a good way. The Supreme Court Justice has seemingly been the benefactor of cash, trips, a home for his mom, home improvements for his mom in that home, and private school tuition for his nephew. About the only thing they haven’t gotten seems to be a free trip to space from Elon Musk, but hey, it is still early.

It all began with news surfacing that Thomas had undisclosed cash and trips furnished to him from billionaire and Nazi memorabilia enthusiast, Harlan Crow. Then it was discovered that Crow not only bought his mother’s Florida home, but allowed her to continue living in it. On top of that, Crow provided tens of thousands of dollars worth of improvements to that home.

Add to that, mysterious “income” apparently was collected by Thomas annually from a company that ceased to exist.

His wife Ginni has also allegedly been the recipient of more secret payments, the latest coming from Leonard Leo, a conservative activist who has fought for decades to stack the court for the right wing of our political spectrum. Those payments came from former Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway.

Conway has even admitted that Leo purposefully and intentionally instructed her to obscure the payments and “make no mention” of Ginni Thomas being the recipient of the payments, which were funneled through Conway. The only “explanation” that has been given for her name being omitted from the payments was about avoiding “gossipy people.”

The same year, the nonprofit, the Judicial Education Project, filed a brief to the Supreme Court in a landmark voting rights case.

The Judicial Education Project filed an amicus brief in the case Shelby County v. Holder, taking the side of those opposed to a key provision in the Voting Rights Act of 1965. As the Washington Post notes:

The court struck down a formula in the Voting Rights Act that determined which states had to obtain federal clearance before changing their voting rules and procedures. Clarence Thomas was part of the 5-to-4 majority.

As far as Clarence Thomas’s windfalls go, the lawyer who has represented Ginni Thomas offered an odd defense in a tweet.

In that “defense, the attorney, Mark Paoletta, highlights parts of the law that would seem to exclude the payments for the grandnephew dependent. But the part that gets glossed over, namely section 152 of the 1986 internal revenue code, reads like the opposite of Paoletta’s claims.

All of this begs the question — when is someone other than the press going to actually take a serious look at Clarence and Ginni Thomas’s apparent massive corruption? John Roberts, the court’s Chief Justice, has essentially given Congress the middle finger when asked to talk to them about the SCOTUS’s ethical standards.

Our democracy isn’t only being threatened by radical fringe groups like the MAGA movement and Q-Anon. Our Supreme Court looks more and more like it has been “open for business,” at least in Thomas’s case for decades.

At the very least, it appears to be long overdue that we have a thorough review of all the justices’ financials (not just Clarence Thomas) and some serious reform in the laws that they must abide by. Anything short of that is just a surrender of our democracy and nation as most of us know it.