'Absurd': Legal analysts erupt over GOP donor buying Clarence Thomas' property

Legal experts reacted in astonishment on Thursday after ProPublica reported more details about the relationship between Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Republican mega-donor Harlan Crow.

In the latest story, it was revealed that Thomas sold a piece of property to Crow in 2014 without disclosing the sale. Justices are required to report most real estate sales over $1,000.

Previous reports revealed Crow was paying for the Thomas family to go on lavish vacations to Indonesia, island hopping on a private yacht, and using Crows' private jet.

“The justice’s failure to report the transaction suggests ‘Thomas was hiding a financial relationship with Crow,’" said Kathleen Clark, a legal ethics expert, quoted in the report.

IN OTHER NEWS: GOP congressman introduces bill that would punish Bragg for investigating Trump

"Now that's A BRIBE," The Nation's justice correspondent Elie Mystal wrote in all caps. He then posted a gif of a man with his head in the sand, calling it "Chief Justice John Roberts." He joked that he was waiting for the Wall Street Journal to prepare its editorials saying, "Nothing to see here."

"TIRED: Impeaching Presidents for soliciting bribes. WIRED: Impeaching Supreme Court justices for soliciting bribes," he also quipped.

Crow released a statement saying that the purpose of the property was for historic preservation. It was Thomas' childhood home and Crow claimed he would turn it into a museum. It just hasn't happened in the past nine years.

"This Crow statement is absurd," wrote NYU Law professor Andrew Weissmann, who previously served as a prosecutor on special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. "What price was paid to Thomas v market rate will be important BUT no matter it still had to be disclosed."

It also sparked a conversation about Justice Abe Fortas, who was impeached. The Brennan Center cited the Senate hearing transcripts saying that the Fortas' nomination hearing revealed, “[a]s a sitting justice, he regularly attended White House staff meetings; he briefed the president on secret Court deliberations; and, on behalf of the president, he pressured senators who opposed the war in Vietnam.”

NYU Law assistant professor Noah Rosenblum called it "especially problematic."

Slate columnist Mark Joseph Stern brought it back to "Clarence Thomas' beliefs that the First Amendment prohibits virtually any disclosure laws for campaign finance and political contribution is starting to make a lot more sense."

U.S. Senate Democrats and ethics watchdog groups have urged the DOJ to investigate.