Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro's Finances to Be Investigated by Dept. of State

Supreme Court Justice’s campaign finance reports contain 30 questionable contributions totaling over $130,000.

Publicly available documents suggest that Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro may be accepting illegal campaign contributions, according to the grassroots citizens’ organization PACleanSweep.

After reviewing Nigro’s campaign finance reports, PACleanSweep researchers uncovered 30 suspicious contributions including 13 that appear to be from sources prohibited by law.

In a letter sent today to the Pennsylvania Department of State’s Director of Campaign Finance, PACleanSweep Research Director Leo Knepper formally requested an investigation of Nigro’s campaign committee.

“A quick glance at Nigro’s campaign finance reports reveals that he is not in compliance with the law,” said Knepper. “It’s not one or two minor errors. Dozens of entries fail to pass the smell test.”

“Many entries are incomplete. 13 imply that the contributions came from businesses, most of which would be illegal,” noted Knepper.

Campaign finance laws prohibit Nigro from receiving contributions from corporations and other associations, and require him to obtain and disclose the full name, address, occupation, and employer of persons who donate more than $250.

Nigro’s campaign finance reports list 17 contributions without providing legally required information. More troubling were 13 other contributions totaling $53,925 attributed to law firms that appear to be from illegal sources.

Nigro’s suspicious contributions include:

$10,000.00 on April 27, 2005 from “Saul Ewing LLP.” Nigro listed the contributor as a “Political Committee” despite no such committee having registered with the Commonwealth.

$10,000.00 on August 16, 2005 from “Swartz Campbell LLC.” LLCs are prohibited by law from making political contributions, according to the PA Department of State’s Bureau of Elections.

$20,000.00 on August 22, 2005 from “Hangley Aronchick Segal & Pudlin.” The “Occupation” was listed as “Attorneys” (plural). PACleanSweep contacted the contributors’ Philadelphia office and was told, “We’re a corporation.”

$20,000.00 on June 24, 2005 from “Sprague & Sprague.” The occupation listed was “Attorney” (singular) but Nigro failed to report the full name of the person contributing.

During his initial review of Nigro’s reports, Knepper was immediately shocked at the large number of donations that appeared to be from law firms. “Nigro’s reports are stating that the firms themselves made the contribution. Even if an actual person sent the money, Nigro attributes it to the firm.”

Knepper was quick to acknowledge the possibility that Nigro’s contributions were lawful. “They look to be illegal. But it is possible Nigro has simply made dozens of major bookkeeping mistakes. If that is the case, let him prove it, correct the mistakes, and apologize for the error,” suggested Knepper.

“This man is a Supreme Court Justice. He’s charged with interpreting our laws and protecting our rights,” noted PACleanSweep Chair Russ Diamond. “If he can’t comply with some of the simplest requirements of campaign finance law, how could he possibly deserve another 10 year term?”

“Taking Nigro’s reports at face value, one is left with an unsettling dilemma,” noted PACleanSweep Strategic Director Mike Bergmaier. “If the reports are accurate, Nigro has violated campaign finance law by accepting prohibited contributions. If the reports are inaccurate, Nigro has systematically violated campaign finance reporting law.”

“Either way you slice it,” Bergmaier concluded, “the law appears to have been violated.”

“Nigro simply should not accept contributions from law firms,” said Diamond. “Even lawful contributions from attorneys raise ethical concerns if those attorneys argue cases before Nigro.”

PACleanSweep’s investigation uncovered a number of prominent attorneys and law firms had contributed to Nigro’s retention effort. High profile personal injury and medical malpractice firms such as The Colleran Firm, Wapner Newman, and Feldman Shepherd Wohlgelernter Tanner appear on Nigro’s reports.

Nigro also received contributions from firms that argued numerous cases before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, including Sprague & Sprague, Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, and Hangley Aronchick Segal & Pudlin.

“I find this appearance of impropriety very disturbing. These are firms that appear before the Supreme Court. Does Nigro plan to recuse himself whenever these firms are involved in a case?” asked Knepper.

PACleanSweep’s investigative report into Justice Nigro’s campaign finances has been published online at www.PACleanSweep.com/nigroreport.html.

PACleanSweep is a non-partisan effort dedicated to defeating incumbent lawmakers in the Pennsylvania General Assembly and replacing them with true public servants.