Two days before oral arguments in a US supreme court case set to have a major impact on federal health and environmental regulation, a leading government watchdog called on Neil Gorsuch to recuse himself over close links to a billionaire oil baron who has hosted the rightwing justice at a mountain resort called Eagles Nest for weekends of dove shooting and who stands to benefit from the ruling at hand.
“Not only would overturning Chevron deference strip power from federal agencies, harming their ability to serve everyday Americans – but now, we know billionaire oil baron Philip Anschutz would score big from a favourable ruling by his friend on the high court,” said Caroline Ciccone, president of Accountable.US.
“It’s far past time for these justices to stop putting their billionaire pals over Americans. Recusal from cases where they have glaring conflicts of interest is the very least they can do to restore some semblance of credibility and integrity to our supreme court.”
The case at hand, Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo, considers whether the National Marine Fisheries Service can compel fishing vessels to pay the salaries of federal observers ensuring stocks are not overfished.
But the case has much wider implications because it is thought likely to remove the Chevron deference, a principle named for a 1984 case involving the eponymous oil giant which established that federal agencies have the discretion to issue regulatory rules without congressional approval.
Ben Johnson, a professor of law at the University of Florida, recently told the Amicus podcast, from Slate, those who wish to see Chevron fall see “the courts [as] a more reliable enforcer of [their] view of policy [and] don’t want agencies to have the ability to expand or contract their mission”.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, in Virginia, said: “People and entities championing the end of Chevron deference are hoping it will presage the demise of the so-called ‘administrative state’, which they believe prevents certain interests from maximising profits through ‘overregulation’.”
Gorsuch has indicated he thinks Chevron should go.
Like Gorsuch, 56, Anschutz, 84, is from Colorado. Anschutz has interests in energy, railroads, telecoms, real estate and entertainment, owning the Los Angeles Kings in the NHL, a stake in the Los Angeles Galaxy of MLS and the Coachella music festival. Forbes magazine pegs his fortune at $14.9bn, quoting him thus: “When you see what can be done, the possibilities, you want to be involved in something. You want to own it.”
Anschutz’s ties to Gorsuch are a matter of public record.
In March 2017, as Gorsuch prepared to become the first of three rightwingers installed on the supreme court by Donald Trump, the New York Times ran a report under the headline, Neil Gorsuch Has Web of Ties to Secretive Billionaire.
For 10 years from 1995, Gorsuch worked at a Washington law firm that represented Anschutz. In 2006, a lawyer at another firm wrote to Harriet Myers, White House counsel under George W Bush, to recommend Gorsuch for the 10th circuit court of appeals.
“I am writing at the request of Philip F Anschutz,” the lawyer wrote, adding: “Mr Anschutz spoke with Senator [Wayne] Allard [a Republican senator from Colorado] about Neil Gorsuch, and Senator Allard suggested we pass along Mr Gorsuch’s resume to you.”
That May, Gorsuch was confirmed to the court, which covers western states including Colorado.
Gorsuch became, the Times said, a “semi-regular” speaker at Eagles Nest – a sprawling ranch which came to international prominence in 2006, when the then British deputy prime minister, John Prescott, faced questions about a stay there, given Anschutz’s opposition to LGBTQ+ rights and questioning of evolution.
Prescott said he went to Colorado to discuss Anschutz’s ownership of the Millennium Dome in London, where Anschutz wanted to build a casino, and because Prescott was “curious” about such western ranches, adding: “I saw the cowboy films over my young years, didn’t you?”
In 2017, the Times published Gorsuch’s notes for remarks at Eagles Nest in 2010.
“They say a country’s prosperity depends on three things: sound money, private property and the rule of law,” Gorsuch said. “This crowd hardly needs to hear from me about the … problems we face on those scores.”
Renewed focus on Gorsuch and Anschutz comes as outlets led by ProPublica have detailed close relationships between rightwing justices, particularly Clarence Thomas, and Republican donors prominently including Harlan Crow, a property magnate and collector of memorabilia linked to Adolf Hitler and other dictators.
Thomas denies wrongdoing but reports on his acceptance of and failure to declare gifts including luxury travel, a property purchase and school fees, have fueled calls for ethics reform.
Gorsuch has also been subjected to scrutiny, after Politico reported the sale of a Colorado property he co-owned, shortly after his confirmation and without disclosing that the buyer was a lawyer from a firm with business before the court.
One of Gorsuch’s co-owners was Kevin Conwick, Anschutz’s legal counsel. The other was Cannon Harvey, an Anschutz executive. Gorsuch has not commented.
Supreme court justices are nominally subject to the same ethics rules as all federal judges but in practice govern themselves. In November, the justices announced a code of conduct, lamenting the “misunderstanding” that they “regard themselves as unrestricted by any ethics rules”.
They were widely criticised for failing to announce means of enforcement. Furthermore, John Roberts, the chief justice, has rebuffed calls to testify in Congress.
With the court having delivered rightwing wins including the removal of the federal right to abortion (a ruling Gorsuch reportedly took 10 minutes to approve), polling shows public trust at record lows.
Regarding ties between Gorsuch and Anschutz, Ciccone said: “This is just the latest in a long pattern of cozy relationships between supreme court justices and billionaires creating conflicts that undermine the legitimacy of the court.”
Anschutz has not commented on his links to Gorsuch. The supreme court did not respond to a request for comment.
