August 20, 2026 Insider Report

Spain’s Border Verges on Collapse

The migrant crisis in Spain’s North African exclave of Ceuta is getting worse. Last Sunday hundreds of Moroccans and others staged a protest demanding asylum. This follows a massive sudden influx in late July, when more than 72,000 people surged into the tiny territory, nearly doubling its population overnight. Reports say that the invaders were planning to journey from there to Continental Europe. Spanish military forces deployed, though officials claimed that the “vast majority [of the migrants] returned voluntarily in the following days.”

The catalyst seems to be a recent Spanish Supreme Court ruling that favors migration, but does that explain tens of thousands of people spontaneously rushing the border? The scale invites skepticism that it was purely organic. Moving vast numbers of people across a tightly controlled frontier in a concentrated window requires D-Day-level organization, logistics, and at least tacit non-interference by Moroccan authorities who normally manage the border. The numbers indicate coordinated operations rather than random individual decisions.

Possible contributing factors include the turmoil at the Strait of Hormuz choking off oil from Iran. It follows that the Strait of Gibraltar assumes a higher level of significance, and Western energy conglomerates want it. Former Pentagon official Michael Rubin has dutifully helped by publicly encouraging the invasion.

Spain’s recent diplomatic posture may also have made it a target. Madrid has deepened trade and investment agreements with China in an ongoing broader European push toward reducing dollar dependence.

Under Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, Spain has also taken a prominently critical stance toward Israel, recognizing the State of Palestine, supporting related international legal efforts, imposing arms restrictions, and using strong language about the Gaza conflict. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his son Yair have vowed revenge by promising “diplomatic war” and encouraging the Muslim invasion of Ceuta.

Analysts linked to pro-Israel think tanks had earlier in 2026 openly discussed using Moroccan claims on Ceuta and Melilla as a pressure point against Spain. Several Israeli politicians and commentators expressed satisfaction at Spain’s predicament. For instance, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir sarcastically congratulated Sánchez on his commitment to immigration and diversity while urging Spain to open its doors further to Gazans. Other voices, such as neocon Max Abrahms, framed the episode as Spain “getting what it deserves.”

Morocco has long-standing territorial claims on Ceuta and a strategic partnership with the United States and Israel (formalized partly via the Abraham Accords and Western Sahara’s recognition). Meanwhile, Spain continues efforts to improve relations with Algeria, a regional rival of Morocco. Migration has repeatedly served as a tool in these North African and Mediterranean power dynamics.

Of course, migration has been used as a weapon of war since antiquity. It seems Spain is the latest victim of the age-old tactic of governments using barbarian hordes as bioweapons to break up civilization and plunder resources. — Rebecca Terrell

The U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding Has Expired. What Now?

On Monday, August 17, the day that the 60-day Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the United States and Iran expired, President Donald Trump said on Truth Social: “The number one Goal is, and always will be, that Iran cannot have, in any way, shape, or form, a Nuclear Weapon.”

Yet the MoU that Trump agreed to two months earlier did not provide for the removal or elimination of Iran’s enriched uranium. The resolution of that issue was pushed off into the future. Under the MoU, the United States and Iran agreed “to discuss the issue of enrichment, and other mutually agreed matters relating to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear needs, based on a satisfactory framework being agreed upon in the final Deal.” Moreover, “Pending the final Deal … the Islamic Republic of Iran will maintain the current status quo of its nuclear program, and the United States of America will not impose any new sanctions.” Iran did at least reaffirm in the MoU that it would “not procure or develop nuclear weapons,” but the country has said this in the past.

On the other hand, the Trump-signed MoU said that the United States “undertakes, with regional partners, to develop a definitive mutually agreed plan with at least USD 300 Billion, for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” If you think that does not sound like an “America First” foreign policy that’s in harmony with a “Make America Great Again” agenda, you are not alone. It sounds more like a “Make Iran Great Again” agenda, doesn’t it?

But the MoU — which was supposed to permanently terminate hostilities — is now formally dead, although it had already been declared dead weeks ago by both the United States and Iran because of the resumption of hostilities that occurred soon after it was signed. So what now?

On August 12, Trump claimed in a Truth Social post that the United States “has total control over the Strait of Hormuz,” and added in all capital letters, “I THINK WE WILL KEEP IT!” Two days later, in a speech, he said that “pretty soon” he’ll “be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States.” And four days after that, on August 18, he posted on Truth Social a map showing the Strait of Hormuz circled under the heading “NEW U.S. Territory.” Is he joking?

On August 17, Fox News posted the following “breaking” story on X based on an interview with the president:

BREAKING: President Trump tells @TreyYingst he’s in “no hurry” as a backchannel with Iranian Revolutionary Guard officials remains open despite Tehran’s public defiance.

Trump says Iran is dying and playing its hand like a good poker player, projecting strength publicly while facing mounting pressure behind the scenes. His message is that Iran should wave the white flag.

And he delivers a stark warning to Oman: “If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the s— out of them.”

That’s quite a threat to make against a country that has long been considered an ally of the United States in the Middle East. But Oman has incurred Trump’s wrath because it has been negotiating with Iran about the Strait of Hormuz.

So, is “Iran dying and playing its hand like a good poker player”? Is Trump bluffing with his verbal threat against Oman? And is he playing the “joker” card by claiming he’ll soon make the Strait of Hormuz an American territory? After all, the United States has no claim to the strait, and under the U.S. Constitution it would not be the president’s decision to make anyway.

But the ongoing war with Iran is no joking matter. As of this writing, almost six months after what was supposed to be a quick military operation began, there does not seem to be any end in sight. The Iran War has become another tragic example of the follies of U.S. foreign military interventionism in the Middle East — and another important reminder of the wisdom of America’s Founding Fathers to adhere to a noninterventionist foreign policy and avoid interjecting ourselves into the quarrels of other nations. — Gary Benoit

Flock’s Connection to Video-altering Technology

Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based company founded in 2017, operates one of the largest networks of automated license-plate-reader cameras in the United States — reports estimate the company has as many as 100,000 devices across nearly all states. The solar-powered or hardwired cameras capture a vehicle’s license plate; make, model, and color; and other identifying features, feeding data into a searchable national database used primarily by law enforcement. Flock markets the system as a tool for solving crimes.

Critics call Flock cameras instruments of warrantless search, and public backlash has been harsh.

New information adds fuel to the fire — Flock may have ties to an Israeli company capable of altering camera footage. The lead investor in Flock also funds an Israeli firm that “can hack cameras and change the footage.” The company is Toka, co-founded in 2018 by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and former Israel Defense Forces cyber official Yaron Rosen. Haaretz reports that Toka develops tools that allow government clients to locate security cameras or webcams in a given area, access live feeds, and manipulate both live and recorded video without leaving forensic traces. The company has positioned itself as a provider of offensive cyber capabilities for state actors and has sought business with U.S. agencies.

The documented link between Flock and Toka runs primarily through shared venture capital rather than ownership, technology licensing, or operational control. Andreessen Horowitz is the leading foreign investor in Israeli start-ups, and is also a major investor in Flock Safety and in Toka.

The situation recalls the Amdocs episode of 2001. Fox News’ Carl Cameron reported at the time, “Here’s how the system works. Most directory assistance calls, and virtually all call records and billing in the U.S. are done for the phone companies by Amdocs Ltd., an Israeli-based private telecommunications company. Amdocs has contracts with the 25 biggest phone companies in America, and more worldwide. The White House and other secure government phone lines are protected, but it is virtually impossible to make a call on normal phones without generating an Amdocs record of it.”

“In recent years, the FBI and other government agencies have investigated Amdocs more than once. The firm has repeatedly and adamantly denied any security breaches or wrongdoing,” Cameron continued. “What U.S. government officials are worried about, however, is the possibility that Amdocs data could get into the wrong hands, particularly organized crime.”

Fox News drew sharp criticism at the time for implying that Amdocs and another Israeli company called Comverse Infosys may have been using telecommunications data to tip off Israeli organized crime.

Fast-forward to the modern era. If Flock cameras are used in tandem with Toka’s footage-altering technology, a very real possibility exists that images could be erased or video altered to protect sensitive Israeli operations on U.S. soil or delete any evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Israeli organized crime in the United States. The technology could be used to delete real evidence and/or plant false evidence. — Rebecca Terrell

South Dakota Legislators to Consider “Safeguards” on License-plate Readers

The South Dakota Legislature is expected to consider legislation to enact “safeguards” on license-plate readers (LPRs).

On August 12, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced that he would propose legislation “to ensure that License Plate Reader (LPR) technology is used solely for legitimate law enforcement purposes with strong protections for the public’s privacy.”

Jackley’s press release claimed that “LPRs have proven valuable in helping investigators solve serious crimes and for public safety,” but that “their use must be balanced with clear, responsible limits.” Specifically, he called for “limiting LPR use to legitimate investigative purposes and requiring the destruction of data within an established period of time.”

In a Facebook post, Jackley noted that the Legislature would consider his proposal during its 2027 regular session. He also told local news website South Dakota Searchlight that he would work with Lance Russell, his presumptive successor as attorney general next year, in the legislative effort.

Although Jackley’s proposal sounds good, enacting “limits” on LPRs is not enough — state legislators must ban them. The use of LPRs undermines the Fourth Amendment’s protection of “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Additionally, The New American has reported about Flock LPRs:

Flock has received sizable pushback for operating under bad licenses, misreading plates, and getting vehicle “fingerprints” wrong, leading to innocent citizens being stopped and harassed. The tech is even being weaponized by law enforcement to stalk people.

The use of LPRs is also expanding the federal surveillance state. As the Tenth Amendment Center reported:

As reported in The Wall Street Journal, the [federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)] operates the National License Plate Reader Program (NLPRP). The system tracks the location of millions of vehicles through data provided by ALPRs [automated license-plate readers] operated on a state and local level. They’ve engaged in this for over a decade, all without a warrant. There wasn’t even public notice of the policy until 2019.

As confirmed by the NLPRP itself, state and local law enforcement agencies partner with the DEA. State and local authorities operate most of these tracking systems, often paid for by federal grant money. The DEA then taps into the local database to track the whereabouts of millions of people — for the “crime” of driving — without having to operate a huge network itself.

Since a majority of federal license plate tracking data comes from state and local law enforcement, laws banning or even restricting ALPR use are essential. As more states pass such laws, the result becomes more clear. No data equals no federal license plate tracking program.

The growing use of LPRs is an example of an emerging “algorithmic state” directed by the federal government. They blatantly threaten individual liberty and privacy, and any limited “benefits” are clearly outweighed by their dangers.

As Benjamin Franklin famously declared, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” State legislators must boldly protect “essential liberty” and resist the urge to “obtain a little temporary safety.”

South Dakota residents can use The John Birch Society’s legislative alert to contact their state lawmakers. All Americans are encouraged to contact their own legislators in opposition to LPRs and other forms of mass surveillance. — Peter Rykowski

Border-wall Update: Construction Underway; 1,200 Miles Planned

Armed with a record amount of congressionally appropriated funding, the Trump administration is ramping up border-wall construction along the U.S. border with Mexico.

According to data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), as of mid-August 2026, about 365 miles of primary border wall, 58 miles of replacement border wall, and 423 miles of secondary border wall either are now under construction or have been completed since U.S. President Donald Trump took office in January 2025. Additionally, according to a report by The New York Times, CBP has awarded $33 billion in construction contracts for other sections of primary border wall. About 644 miles of primary border wall and 75 miles of secondary border wall existed in January 2025.

Altogether, the Trump administration plans to complete 1,200 miles of new primary and secondary border wall, as well as hundreds of miles of vehicle barriers, roads and technology, buoy barriers, and replacement border wall. According to the Times, administration officials are aiming to finish primary-wall construction by the end of 2027, and secondary-wall construction by July 2028.

CBP describes the border-barrier system as a “smart wall,” consisting of “a combination of primary and secondary steel bollard wall, waterborne barriers, patrol roads, and the technology required to tie it all together, such as cameras, lights, and other detection technology.” The growing use of technology comes as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies increasingly deploy surveillance technology that could potentially be used against American citizens.

This massive building spree is funded by $46.5 billion included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), which Congress enacted last year. According to the Times, this funding “is more than all border wall funding combined over the past 20 years,” and “can be spent through September 2029.” Additionally, the Secure America Act (S. 2), which Congress enacted in June, included $3.45 billion for border-security operations and technology.

During Trump’s first term, his administration completed about 450 miles of border wall, most of which replaced existing — and often inferior — border barriers. Back then, though, Trump relied on funding that his administration redirected from other sources.

Although the current border-wall construction is certainly a positive development, it is only one step toward securing America’s borders. For example, although arrests by ICE rose earlier this year and the administration has taken other actions to restrict migration — including revoking more than 175,000 visas and tightening asylum and public-benefits rules — the number of deportations continues to lag behind the administration’s goal.

Additionally, Congress must do its part to stop mass migration. For example, it should enact watertight asylum and removal laws that would ease the process of cracking down on illegal migration and prevent manipulation by a future leftist administration or the judiciary. Related to this, the U.S. government must withdraw from various UN agreements, such as the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees and the UN Convention Against Torture, to further prevent illegal aliens from abusing U.S. asylum laws.

Congress must enact clearer immigration laws. Many of the federal government’s existing laws are vaguely written and explicitly delegate congressional power to the president in violation of Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, explaining why presidential administrations can implement massive shifts in public policy without congressional action. Along with this, Congress must repeal pro-mass-migration laws such as the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, Refugee Act of 1980, Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, and Immigration Act of 1990.

Americans must urge their U.S. representative and senators, as well as their state legislators, to take bold action to end mass migration. — Peter Rykowski

Water Systems in Seven States Hacked

Malicious cyber actors have targeted water and wastewater utilities in at least seven states. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued warnings that attackers were attempting to disrupt critical water infrastructure.

Shadowy actors targeted water facilities connected to the internet. After gaining remote access, they changed IP addresses and passwords, causing loss of monitoring and control functionality. Reported effects included flooding and drops in water pressure, which can allow untreated water to enter distribution pipes.

U.S. officials have linked the activity to Iranian-affiliated actors, in the wake of U.S. attacks on the Strait of Hormuz. More than 30 municipal water facilities in Minnesota were affected in the initial wave. A Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) advisory, originally issued in April and updated on July 22, documented Iranian-affiliated actors exploiting devices at water facilities across U.S. critical infrastructure since at least March 2026. The activity included theft of project files and manipulation of device logic.

A separate threat comes from Chinese state-sponsored actors. According to federal reports, the group known as Volt Typhoon has been pre-positioned in critical U.S. infrastructure, including drinking-water facilities. Officials deem that these actors seek the capability to disrupt operations during future geopolitical tensions rather than to cause immediate crises.

Weaknesses that allow this exploitation are long-standing. The Cyberspace Solarium Commission noted in 2020 that water utilities remained largely ill-prepared to defend against cyber-enabled disruption.

Water systems remain primarily under local and state jurisdiction. Experts have repeatedly urged operators to remove internet-exposed operational technology from public networks — the single most-effective step available — yet many systems continue to rely on such connections.

The recent attacks did not introduce new vulnerabilities. They exploited internet-exposed controllers, weak access controls, and incomplete risk planning that have long been documented.

The question that people should be asking is not only who hacked the water systems, but who decided that protecting them was less important than everything else government has been doing with taxpayer money. — Rebecca Terrell

U.S. to Withdraw Troops From Iraq but Retain Bases in Dozens of Countries

U.S. and Iraqi officials confirmed last week that the United States will withdraw its remaining soldiers from Iraq at the end of September. If a full withdrawal is completed, it would be the first time that no American soldiers have been in Iraq since the United States invaded in 2003.

The Associated Press reported:

U.S. troops pulled out of bases in most areas of Iraq last year but maintained a presence in the semi-autonomous northern Kurdish region. Bases there have regularly come under attack since the U.S. and Israel launched the war on Iran on Feb. 28.

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi met with Adm. Brad Cooper, who leads the U.S. Central Command, on Wednesday [August 12]. Al-Zaidi said in a statement afterward that he had affirmed Sept. 30 as the “fixed and final date for ending the military mission of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS in Iraq and completing the departure of its forces.”

A U.S. official confirmed that the U.S. expects to complete its pullout by Sept. 30, but declined to say how many troops remain in Iraq or where they would be redeployed.

Although the impending withdrawal from Iraq is good news, the United States will continue to maintain numerous military bases in dozens of countries.

Because of differing definitions of what counts as a “base” (among other criteria), the precise number of overseas bases is not agreed upon. A 2024 Congressional Research Service report identified “at least 128 overseas bases in at least 51 different countries” that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) maintained a permanent presence in, based on unclassified records. A 2021 report by the Quincy Institute, which used a broader definition of a “base” and included installations on U.S. territories, found that the United States maintained 750 bases in 80 countries or territories, costing taxpayers $55 billion per year. And as of December 2025, more than 220,000 U.S. troops or DoD civilians were stationed overseas.

Regardless of the exact number, the United States’ presence abroad is not consistent with the Founding Fathers’ recommended policy of noninterventionism. In his 1796 Farewell Address, President George Washington declared, “The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.” And in his 1801 Inaugural Address, President Thomas Jefferson called for “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” The sheer number of U.S. military bases worldwide is a stark reminder of how entangled the United States has become in world affairs.

Instead of directing the United States to act as the “world’s policeman,” American leaders must once again restore a traditional foreign policy of noninterventionism and zealous protection of American independence — and “We the People” must hold our elected officials accountable to the founding principles of our Republic. — Peter Rykowski

In June, the U.S. Department of the Treasury quietly released the annual Social Security and Medicare Trustees Report, and its findings should have dominated every front page in America. Social Security’s Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund will be depleted in late 2032, forcing an automatic 22-percent cut to retirement benefits unless Congress acts. The insolvency date was moved up by one year from the previous projection, indicating accelerating financial pressure on the unconstitutional program.

For the roughly 70 million Americans who depend on Social Security, this means a significant income loss starting in six years.

Demographic shifts have promoted the deterioration. In 1940, when Social Security began, there were 159 workers for every one retiree; in 2026, the ratio is 2.7 to one. Because of artificial birth control, legalized abortion, and the aggressive promotion of non-childbearing lifestyles, America’s demographics have skewed beyond recognition.

There is no relief in sight. Economists calculate that a payroll tax increase of 4.25 percentage points would be needed if reform starts in 2026. Delaying action until 2034 would require a tax increase of 4.90 percentage points.

As usual, Congress has remained silent in response to the largest financial cliff facing American retirees in the program’s history. Instead of addressing the unconstitutionality of Social Security and abolishing this federal tax masquerading as insurance, its only response has been a bill requiring Congress to vote on a plan, not a plan itself. Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano, asked during a House subcommittee hearing about possible benefit cuts in 2032, said that it’s up to Congress to solve the issue. So while Congress is passing bills requiring itself to eventually consider ideas, the agency responsible for Social Security is pointing at Congress.

On the other side of the globe, a related incident occurred that caused barely a blip in American media. BRICS labor and employment ministers adopted a joint declaration at their meeting in Hyderabad, India, last month. They committed to closer cooperation in areas such as labor, including expanding their social-security coverage. (BRICS is a bloc of emerging economies that is working to shift away from the U.S. dollar as the primary global reserve asset and away from reliance on Western financial institutions.)

A highlight of the meeting was the launch of BRICS CONNECT, the BRICS Cooperation Network for Capacity Building, Employability, and New Skills and Technologies — a flagship initiative of India’s presidency aimed at strengthening capacity building, knowledge sharing, and technical collaboration among BRICS nations.

The juxtaposition is ironic. The United States, which created the modern social-security model the world largely copied, is six years away from automatic benefit cuts affecting 70 million retirees, with no serious plan in motion and a legislature that has spent 2026 focused on an unauthorized war in Iran; the One Big Beautiful Bill, which raised the national debt ceiling by $5 trillion; and a string of scandals regarding foreigners in the country bilking Medicaid, Social Security, and a host of other entitlement programs to the tune of billions. Meanwhile, a bloc representing more than half the world’s population is actively constructing new institutional frameworks for social-security and labor-market reform — frameworks explicitly designed to operate outside Western-dominated institutions. — Rebecca Terrell

Setback for Wyoming Freedom Caucus in GOP Primaries

In a setback for limited, constitutional government, the Wyoming Freedom Caucus lost seats in the state Legislature in Tuesday’s primary elections.

More than a dozen Freedom Caucus-aligned incumbents lost to more-moderate challengers, in what Cowboy State Daily described as “a near-complete massacre of Freedom Caucus members and their allies.” Meanwhile, state Senator Eric Barlow (R-Gillette), who holds a dismal 41-percent Freedom Index score, defeated two conservative challengers in the GOP primary for governor.

The results were not all disappointing, though. U.S. Representative Harriet Hageman (R), who has a 90-percent Freedom Index score, won the GOP primary for U.S. Senate, while Secretary of State Chuck Gray, who earned a 100-percent Freedom Index score while serving in the state Legislature, won the GOP primary to succeed Hageman in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Wyoming Freedom Caucus, which won a majority in the state House in the 2024 elections, sought to implement conservative, limited-government policies, such as cutting spending and property taxes, strengthening election integrity, eliminating government bureaucracy, and abolishing “diversity, equity, and inclusion” in state government. The Establishment, however, sought to block many of these priorities, and left-leaning judges struck down certain enacted measures.

Wyoming’s election results mirror the results in other states so far this year, most notably U.S. Representative Thomas Massie’s (R-Ky.) defeat to primary challenger Ed Gallrein. What explains these disappointing results? At the core, they are the result of an electorate that lacks understanding about America’s founding principles and to what extent their elected officials are upholding those principles.

The solution is education. An informed, vigilant electorate will vote for candidates who support the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. The John Birch Society, the parent organization of The New American, exists to create an electorate that is both informed and actively working to restore adherence to our founding principles. As JBS founder Robert Welch pointed out at the group’s founding meeting in 1958, “All we must find and build and use, to win, is sufficient understanding.”

Despite this year’s disappointing election results, we must not lose hope. We can and will save our Republic — but only if we take concerted action and get others involved. — Peter Rykowski

Government for Sale to the Highest Bidder

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito gained up to $2.9 million from his fossil-fuel interests between 2005 and 2024, according to a review of financial disclosures from the nonprofit advocacy group Court Accountability. Though the Supreme Court is about to hear a case involving two oil companies, Suncor Energy and Exxon, Alito refuses to recuse himself.

The background is that in 1990, when Alito was nominated to a federal judgeship, his net worth was $300,000, and he reported no direct interest in oil and gas extraction. In 2024, Forbes estimated Alito’s net worth to be $10 million — more than a quarter of which could be attributable to oil and gas interests.

Because he sold his direct Exxon shares, Alito says that he need not recuse himself from the current case. But Lisa Graves, co-founder of Court Accountability, questioned the timing of that sale, arguing that a justice shouldn’t be able to offload a stock specifically to preserve his ability to sit on a case involving that company.

An additional twist involves billionaire Paul Singer’s Elliott Investment Management, which holds more than 52 million shares in Suncor Energy worth more than $2.3 billion. Singer’s firm also maintains a controlling majority stake in Validus Energy, which acquired the company that holds the Alito family’s Oklahoma mineral rights.

However, the situation does not trigger recusal under ham-fisted ethics rules that the justices themselves drafted in 2023, and which they interpret and enforce.

Alito is not the only justice whose ethics are questioned, nor is he alone in not having faced meaningful accountability.

For more than two decades, Justice Clarence Thomas accepted luxury travel and hospitality from Texas real-estate billionaire and major Republican donor Harlan Crow — private jets, stays at Crow’s exclusive Adirondacks resort, and voyages on Crow’s megayacht. Many of these benefits went undisclosed for years. Plus, according to ProPublica, Crow purchased Thomas’ mother’s Georgia home at above-market value — a transaction Thomas failed to disclose as required under the Ethics in Government Act. Thomas’ wife, Ginni, simultaneously operated political consulting businesses with ties to conservative funding networks connected to activist Leonard Leo, who also arranged a luxury Alaska fishing trip for Alito involving Harlan Crow’s friend Paul Singer — a trip Alito did not disclose.

Justice Neil Gors u ch sold 40 acres of property — just days after his Senate confirmation — to the head of one of the nation’s largest law firms, Greenberg Traurig, which has since had 22 cases before the Supreme Court, with Gorsuch siding with the firm at least eight times. When Gorsuch reported the $1.8 million sale, the field asking for the identity of the buyer was left blank. The wife of Chief Justice John Roberts has been paid more than $10 million as a job recruiter for placing lawyers at elite law firms, including some that have had cases before the court.

Meanwhile, Thomas has earned $1.5 million from his memoir, Gorsuch $1.7 million from three books, Sonia Sotomayor $4.06 million from her memoir and children’s books, Amy Coney Barrett $1.27 million for her memoir, and Ketanji Brown Jackson $4.14 million for hers — all from commercial publishers whose corporate parents have business interests that periodically come before the court.

The judicial branch holds no monopoly on this type of arrangement. President Trump is being sued over his plan to sell priority access to his Truth Social posts, charging up to $100,000 for subscribers to see presidential statements before the general public sees them. That’s right: A president whose statements move markets, shape policy, and constitute official governmental communication is proposing to sell advance access to those statements through a publicly traded company in which he holds a significant financial interest.

The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires financial disclosures. It does not provide a mechanism for removing a functionary who violates them, or for overturning decisions in which a conflicted justice participated. Court Accountability and other groups are calling for the Senate to investigate Justice Alito, pointing out that he is the only Supreme Court justice who owns stock in energy companies and should step aside from cases involving those companies. Predictably, the Senate has not acted. — Rebecca Terrell