Because of Justice Neil Gorsuch’s ties to oil billionaire Philip Anschutz, he is being called to recuse from an environmental case on the high court’s docket, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado. Despite years of ethical scandals surrounding the justices, there are still many open questions over when the justices need to recuse and how that decision is made. In this case, the owner of Anschutz Exploration Corporation stands to benefit heavily if the court greenlights an 88-mile oil and gas rail line in Utah, Courthouse News reports. And Gorsuch served as counsel to Anschutz and his companies in the early 2000s. The Trump appointee has detailed annual hunting retreats on Anschutz’s estates and even bought an investment property with Anschutz business associates. The justice himself will be the one to decide whether he hears the case, though the advocacy groups claim Gorsuch’s recusal is warranted:
“The cozy relationship between Philip F. Anschultz and Justice Gorsuch far surpasses the standard of ‘reasonably questioned impartiality’ for the federal recusal statute,” watchdog group Accountable.US and others wrote in a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts on Thursday. “This relationship that creates a conflict of interest is just the latest example of countless violations in the yearslong Supreme Court ethics crisis.” Anschutz’s oil wells in Utah’s Uinta Basin could benefit from the contested railway, which would cut the company’s freighting costs and increase profits, according to Accountable.US. Anschutz’s company filed an amicus brief before the court, urging the justices to ruling in favor of the line’s construction. Because of Anschutz’s oil and gas operations in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, he must undergo a Bureau of Land Management environmental review for every development in its portfolio. Accountable.US says rolling back the law would lower Anschutz’s regulatory costs and drive up its profits.
Comments