Texans for Public Justice

Austin: Seven Texas Supreme Court justices elected since 1994 raised a total of $9,166,450 in contributions of at least $100 for their most recent elections. Sources closely linked to litigants with cases before the same court contributed $3.7 million, or 40 percent of the grand total, a new study by Texans for Public Justice shows.

Of the 530 opinions the Supreme Court issued during the period studied, 60 percent (322 cases) are tainted by the fact that at least one of the seven justices took money from sources with an interest in the case. The 41-page report, Payola Justice, linked the seven justices’ contributors to lawyers and litigants who appeared before the court from 1994 through 1997. The seven justices elected since 1994 are Raul Gonzalez, Nathan Hecht, Thomas Phillips, John Cornyn, Priscilla Owen, James Baker and Greg Abbott.

“These facts prove that the self-styled “Clean Slate” court of the 1990s operates like the scandal-plagued court of the 1980s,” said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice. “The current court is as cloaked in corruption as its predecessors. The practice of justices taking money from parties that they judge must end. Texans deserve a cleaner justice system.”

Report highlights include:

• All of the seven justices raised huge sums of money from sources with business before the Supreme Court. Leading the pack on a percentage basis were Justices Cornyn and Abbott, who each received 46% of their money from lawyers and parties with cases before the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Phillips and Justice Baker followed, with each raising 43% of their funds from lawyers and parties before the court.
• The best friends of the court were lawyers. Lawyers and law firms contributed $3.8 million, or 42 percent of the money that the justices raised. Lawyers and firms with cases before the court contributed 80 percent ($3 million) of this money. Vinson & Elkins and its lawyers led the pack, giving the seven justices $244,018. Baker & Botts came next with $169,993. Fulbright & Jaworski contributions of $164,634 ranked third.
• ‘Tort Dodgers’ led the way in individual giving to the court. Developers Richard and David Weekley gave more—$60,000—than any other family. Of the top 16 families contributing to the court, 12 are big donors to Texas’ biggest special-interest PAC, Texans for Lawsuit Reform.
• Corporate PACs and executives gave heavily, contributing $1.4 million to the seven justices. Enron Corp., which had three cases before the court, was the court’s biggest corporate booster, donating $78,700 to the seven justices. HEB Grocery, which had one case during the period (and has another one now pending), contributed $52,169.
• ‘Bundled’ contributions proliferate. Numerous employees of the same law firm or corporation contribute to the same justice on the same day. Baker & Botts lawyers excel at this art, having given Chief Justice Phillips (a former employee) 48 checks on one day and 32 checks to Justice Baker on another day. Enron delivered the justices’ biggest corporate bundles.

“In 1987,‘60 Minutes’ ran an expose on corruption in the Texas Supreme Court called ‘Justice for Sale,’ ” said report co-author Andrew Wheat. “Once perceived as a pro-plaintiff court controlled by high-rolling trial lawyers, 10 years after ‘Justice for Sale,’ this study demonstrates that the court has come full circle and is now a pro-corporate court funded by corporations and their law firms. Whenever parties before the court are also major contributors to the judges you wind up with cross-fertilizations that smell more like manure than justice.”

Payola Justice includes five “Payola Case Studies” of actual Supreme Court cases that illustrate the perils of permitting parties before the court to double as big contributors. The report also includes an appendix that lists the 138 Supreme Court cases from the period studied in which interested parties and law firms contributed at least $20,000 to one or more of the seven justices.

The report concludes that Texans will continue to be served tainted justice until the state stops electing judges through partisan elections. Texas is the largest of just nine states that select Supreme Court justices in this manner. Several alternative ways to appoint justices should be considered. One hybrid system still allows voters to nix bad appointees through “yes” or “no” retention elections.

The report relies on contribution data that the justices filed with the Texas Ethics Commission for the period July 1, 1993 through year-end 1996. These data were compared with data on the Texas Supreme Court’s docket for the period 1994 through October 1997.

The report was compiled and written by Bill Medaille and Andrew Wheat of Texans for Public Justice (TPJ). It is available on TPJ’s web site, http://www.onr.com/tpj. Hard copies of the report also are available from TPJ at (512) 472-9770. Texans for Public Justice is a non-partisan, non-profit, research and advocacy organization which tracks money in politics.

home | Payola Justice | press releases