The Supreme Court held hearings the other day, but someone wasn't there.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas did not attend oral arguments Monday and provided no explanation for his absence.

Chief Justice John Roberts announced that Thomas would not take part shortly after the court sat for arguments in a public corruption case Monday morning. In the past, the court has often provided some explanation, such as noting that a justice was feeling ill.

The Supreme Court has made several controversial rulings recently, and the Supreme Court, Thomas in particular, has been drowning in highly questionable ethics revelations. Which makes the topic of the case in particular ironic.

The US Supreme Court is about to hear an obscure case that could legalize corporations enriching public officials in exchange for lucrative government contracts and other favors.

Though political corruption prosecutions and convictions are already near a historic low, conservative groups are pressuring justices to deliver a far-reaching precedent that would make it much more difficult for law enforcement to prosecute bribery charges against politicians who seek financial remuneration for official actions they take.

This is truly End of Empire stuff. As the court has become more corrupt the court has made it more difficult to prosecute corruption. This is not a new trend. It began under Obama, but accelerated under Trump.

In 2016, the court narrowed the types of acts that can trigger criminal corruption charges when it overturned the corruption convictions of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. Four years later, former allies to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie invoked the McDonnell ruling as they got their Bridgegate convictions overturned.

In 2022 the court overturned the convictions of two New York corruption cases involving developers with ties to former Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration.