Courts

Biglaw Head Bought Neil Gorsuch’s Property In 2017. Yes, We Are Just Learning About It Now.

This is not how judicial ethics is supposed to work.

By Kathryn Rubino on April 25, 2023 12:11 pm
Justice Neil Gorsuch Laughing

(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

The Supreme Court is having a real legitimacy problem. Besides the questionable nature of some of their decisions, the ethics scandals are just nonstop these days. And there’s a new revelation.

In 2005, Neil Gorsuch purchased a property in Colorado as part of an LLC, Walden Group. By 2015, the co-owners were seeking to sell the property. In 2017, after Gorsuch was elevated to the Supreme Court a buyer for the property was found and the deal closed for $1.825 million.

The sale netted Gorsuch between $250,001 and $500,000 — something we know because it was listed on his federal disclosure forms. So, maybe the system works as intended, and Clarence Thomas and all his ethics woes are the true outlier? HAHAHAHAHA. No. The identity of the purchaser was not known at the time… because Gorsuch left that box blank.

It’s only now that Politico reports the purchaser was Brian Duffy, Chief Executive Officer at Greenberg Traurig. The Biglaw firm has been involved in 22 cases before or presented to the Court.

They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties. In the 12 cases where Gorsuch’s opinion is recorded, he sided with Greenberg Traurig clients eight times and against them four times.

In addition, a Denver-based lawyer for Greenberg represented North Dakota in what became one of the more highly publicized rulings in recent years, a multistate suit which reversed former President Barack Obama’s plan to fight climate change through the Clean Air Act.

Gorsuch joined the court’s other five conservative judges in agreeing with the plaintiffs — including Greenberg’s client — that the Environmental Protection Agency had overstepped its authority by regulating carbon emissions from power plants in the decision that makes it more difficult for the executive branch to regulate emissions without express authorization from Congress.

Duffy says he doesn’t actually know Gorsuch and didn’t even realize at first that Gorsuch had an ownership interest in the property, saying, “The fact that he was going to be a Supreme Court justice was absolutely irrelevant to the purchase of that property. It’s a wonderful piece of property and we’re so glad we bought it.”

In fact, Duffy, who historically has donated to Democratic political candidates, never even met him.

“I’ve never spoken to him,” Duffy said. “I’ve never met him.”

Once he learned Gorsuch was among the owners, Duffy said, he cleared the sale with his firm’s ethics department.

And here’s the thing — in my heart I do not believe this transaction changed a single vote Neil Gorsuch has made in his time on the Court. But WHY didn’t he disclose Duffy’s identity? There’s a box right there on the form just begging to be filled out. The standard is supposed to be avoiding the mere appearance of impropriety. Violating that is the problem.

Plus it seems to be endemic at the Court, as Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) noted, “We have seen a steady stream of revelations regarding Supreme Court Justices falling short of the ethical standards expected of other federal judges and of public servants.” “The need for Supreme Court ethics reform is clear, and if the Court does not take adequate action, Congress must. The Senate Judiciary Committee will be closely examining these matters in the coming weeks,” said Durbin.

Revelations about the Court’s undisclosed financial dealings don’t seem to in short supply, but the public’s trust in the institution? That’s a lot more limited.

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on