type: timeline_event ProPublica and the Washington Post reported in September 2023 that Justice Clarence Thomas had secretly attended at least two Koch Network donor summit events over the years, based on accounts from three former network employees and one major donor. The Koch Network—the political and policy operation founded by billionaires Charles and David Koch—had spent 15 years and hundreds of millions of dollars building legal infrastructure specifically designed to bring cases to the Supreme Court on issues including regulatory authority, campaign finance, and property rights. Thomas's attendance at exclusive donor summits where he appeared alongside Koch allies created an extraordinary conflict of interest.
The revelation added to the pattern of Thomas's undisclosed relationships with wealthy conservative donors and movement figures. Koch Network events typically gather major donors for high-level strategy sessions on policy and political priorities, featuring speakers and panel discussions with movement leaders. Thomas's presence at these events—where he would have had substantive interactions with individuals funding organizations bringing cases to his Court—went well beyond ordinary socializing and into territory that ethics experts said should have triggered recusal in Koch-related litigation.
Senator Dick Durbin, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called on Thomas to recuse himself from Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce, cases that involved the Chevron doctrine governing federal agency regulatory authority—a central Koch Network policy priority. Thomas did not recuse himself and voted with the majority in the June 2024 decisions overturning Chevron deference. The cases represented a major victory for the Koch Network's long-standing campaign to limit federal regulatory power, with Thomas participating despite documented relationships with the network's leadership and funders. The revelation exemplified how the conservative movement's decades-long investment in judicial appointments had extended to cultivating ongoing relationships with sitting justices.