Supreme Court justices and donors mingle at campus visits. These documents show the ethical dilemmas

Before Justice Elena Kagan visited the University of Colorado's law school in 2019, one official suggested a "larger donor to staff ratio" for a dinner with her. After Justice Sonia Sotomayor confirmed she would attend a 2017 event at Clemson University and a private luncheon, officials there made sure to invite $1 million-plus donors to the South Carolina college.

The Associated Press obtained tens of thousands of pages of emails and other documents that reveal the extent to which public colleges and universities saw justices' visits as opportunities to generate donations — regularly putting justices in the room with influential donors, including some whose industries had interests before the court.

The documents reveal that justices lent the prestige of their positions to partisan activity or advanced their own personal interests, such as sales of their books, through college visits.

Lower court federal judges are generally barred from engaging in fundraising, political activity and "lending the prestige of judicial office" to advance a judge's own "private interests."

But Supreme Court justices are asked only to adhere to what Chief Justice John Roberts, in a statement signed by all nine members of the court, referred to in April as a set of "ethics principles and practices." The justices provide only a limited accounting of expenses-paid travel and sometimes neglect to disclose events altogether.

The high court's definition of banned fundraising is so narrow — an event that raises more than it costs or where guests are asked for donations — it does not account for soliciting contributors later.

"The Court routinely asks event organizers to confirm that an event at which a Justice will speak is not a fundraiser, and it provides a definition of 'fundraiser' in order to avoid misunderstandings," the Supreme Court said, responding to questions.

The revelations come as the integrity of the nation's top court is questioned due to ethics concerns and polarizing rulings, including last year's decision overturning Roe v. Wade abortion protections. A 2022 survey put trust in the court at a 50-year low, with just 18% expressing a great level of confidence.

That perception that the justices — who this year were paid $285,400, though Roberts earned more — chose public service over more lucrative opportunities started to crack after news reports this year exposed ethical lapses. Those included ProPublica investigations showing that Thomas accepted luxury vacations from a billionaire businessman, Republican donor and longtime friend.

The AP used more than 100 public records requests to obtain details including identities of donors and politicians invited to private receptions, as well as trip perks. AP also contacted more than 100 private schools, organizations and charities where justices spoke.

Before Sotomayor's 2017 visit to Clemson, her staff advised a preference against donors at a luncheon. Still, the invitation list included guests who gave millions of dollars to the school and emails show officials viewed the visit as an opportunity to generate money for a university humanities board.

Brian O'Rourke, an alumni relations official, wrote: "When you say $1M donors, please be sure to include our corporate donors at that level too."

Clemson spokesman Joe Galbraith said it was not a fundraiser and there were no "solicitations of donations requested in association with the visit."

In September 2017, Thomas visited Waco, Texas, to be interviewed by Starr, whose investigation of Clinton's sexual misconduct made him a household name in the 1990s. McLennan Community College scheduled the public interview, a book signing and two private dinners.

Starr's widow, Alice, said donation requests were separate from the visit. "'Friendraising' is what it's called," she said. "And then you do the big ask hopefully later."

The roughly 100 invitees included business people, political leaders, lawyers and donors to the school and the GOP. The school ordered enough copies of Thomas' 2007 memoir, "My Grandfather's Son," for each couple, plus hundreds more for a signing after Thomas' lecture.

School records show guests were shuttled to businessman Clifton Robinson's mansion, where they dined. At the time, Robinson served on the board of directors of Hilltop Holdings, a company with a pending case in federal court. Last year, the Supreme Court declined to take up the case, a favorable outcome for a Hilltop subsidiary that Robinson started. Robinson said he sat next to Thomas at the dinner but never discussed the case.

The day after the dinner, Thomas attended a meal with several school officials, the Starrs, Robinson and a half-dozen other guests. 

As University of Colorado law school officials developed a dinner guest list before a 2019 Kagan visit, one organizer proposed a larger "donor to staff ratio" while a second said she was open to suggestions about which "VIP donors" the school "would like to cultivate relationships with."

A university spokesperson said there were "no solicitations" connected to the event and no gifts resulted from it.

In January 2020, Thomas mixed a University of Florida law school teaching assignment with gatherings involving university donors and political figures.

The school sent its athletic association's private jet to ferry Thomas and his former law clerk Kathryn Mizelle at a cost of more than $16,800. Thomas and Mizelle taught a course on religion and the First Amendment and met with students. The justice also attended VIP events with school and GOP donors, according to agenda materials from the school.

Thomas and Mizelle extended their stay to attend a branch gathering of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal group whose donors helped orchestrate the Supreme Court's shift to the right.

At the event, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, now pursuing the Republican presidential nomination, called Thomas the "greatest living justice." Afterward, Thomas and DeSantis dined with conservative legal activist Leonard Leo, who helped seat conservative justices on the court, according to a person familiar with the dinner.

In 2014, Thomas visited the University of Texas at Tyler for a lecture and dinner sponsored by donors to then-Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert, who later spearheaded a lawsuit that sought to overturn Republican Donald Trump's 2020 presidential election loss.

"Justice Thomas was a wonderful speaker and helped us just by his presence," said Rodney Mabry, the school's president at that time. "Through the dinner, he helped raise money."

In September 2016, Sotomayor visited Colorado for a series of speeches and book events not listed on her financial disclosure, making it unclear who paid for her travel. She stopped at Metropolitan State University at the behest of longtime friend and Democratic activist Polly Baca, emails show.

Baca solicited $15,000 in contributions from nonprofit groups, philanthropists, Democratic donors, law firms and corporations to help offset the $30,000 cost.

There have been times when it seems that a justice gives the appearance of repaying a political favor.

Less than six months after Justice Neil Gorsuch was sworn in as Trump's first Supreme Court nominee, thanks in no small part to the efforts of then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Gorsuch was featured at an event organizers hoped would help eventually raise money for an academic center at the University of Kentucky law school honoring one of McConnell's closest friends.

University spokesman Jay Blanton said the event was not a fundraiser.

The agenda called for Gorsuch and McConnell, R-Ky., to dine with a small private group before a reception at the university president's house that included major GOP donors.

The court said, "Justices exercise caution in attending events that might be described as political in nature, following guidance in the Code of Conduct which cautions judges against engaging in political activity. Merely attending an event where an elected official might also be in attendance — such as several of the events described in your email — does not necessarily render the event impermissibly political in nature."