On December 5, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Moore v. United States, a case that could threaten Congress’s ability to fairly tax corporations and the ultra-wealthy, both now and in the future.

Conservatives—from the Wall Street Journal editorial board to the most prominent right-wing think tanks in the country—hope to use the case as a way to block Congress from fairly taxing wealthy investors and big corporations that use accounting and investment tricks to disguise their real income.

More than a dozen existing tax laws are at stake—with trillions of dollars of revenue on the line. And billionaires and large corporations stand to benefit to the tune of billions of dollars in tax cuts.

If the Supreme Court does the billionaires’ bidding, “the federal income tax could become largely voluntary for multinational corporations and sophisticated investors, and mandatory only for everyday Americans,” in the words of one tax expert.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Chief Justice John Roberts each have clear conflicts of interest relating to this case and must recuse themselves.

• Justice Samuel Alito:

• Stands to personally profit through his stock ownership in 17 corporations that would collectively receive $30 billion in tax savings if the Court overturns long-standing precedent and strikes down the corporate repatriation tax nominally at the center of the case.

• Accepted luxury travel valued at over $100,000 from hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer at the same time that Singer had interests before the Court; Alito neither disclosed the gifts nor recused himself from the case, which ultimately rewarded Singer with a $2.4 billion payout.

• Has maintained close and lucrative ties with Singer, who now stands to profit handsomely from not only the Moore case this term, but also a separate case filed by predatory lenders challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

• Has deployed right-wing lawyer David Rivkin, Jr, to manage Alito’s PR crisis after his financial ties to Singer were exposed and, in the words of Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, could potentially “obstruct [a] congressional investigation into tens of thousands of dollars in gifts he, Alito, personally received and doesn’t want investigated.” All of this occurred at the same time that Rivkin was representing the Moores’ case before the Supreme Court.

• Justice Clarence Thomas:

• Has accepted lavish gifts and big cash payments from a small group of billionaires over the course of two decades, allowing him and his family to live in extreme luxury that they could never have afforded on their own, including: all-expenses paid travel on super yachts and private jets, secret all-male luxury retreats for the super-rich, swanky box suites at big-ticket events, major home renovations and property purchases, and even private school tuition for a close family member.

• Has received “at least 38 destination vacations, 26 private jet flights, six helicopter flights, yacht voyages (including to the Bahamas), a dozen VIP passes to sporting events, and much, much more” from billionaires including Harlan Crow, David Sokol, Wayne Huizenga, and Paul Novelly—all of whom stand to profit enormously from a favorable decision in Moore.

• Has received sizable cash transfers to Thomas’s wife, Ginni, from these same billionaires, funneled through various non-profits in coordination with Federalist Society Board Chair Leonard Leo.

• Justice Neil Gorsuch:

• Owes every step of his judicial career to one special patron, billionaire and GOP mega-donor Philip Anschutz, who helped young Gorsuch land a judgeship on the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals during the George W. Bush administration over more qualified candidates, despite havingnever served as a judge before.

• Was propelled to the top of Donald Trump’s Federalist Society-drafted short list of potential nominees after that same billionaire, Anschutz, made large donations to the group. Anschutz is also believed to have been the single anonymous donor who underwrote the Judicial Crisis Network’s $7 million campaign in 2016 to block President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, and the $10 million campaign to confirm Gorsuch in 2017. Notably, Anschutz’s first-ever donation ($500,000) to Mitch McConnell came exactly one day before McConnell blocked the Garland nomination for the seat that Gorsuch would be nominated for 10 months later. Anschutz has a history of employing some of the same tricks to avoid paying taxes on his investment gains that are at stake in Moore. He lost last time, but that was before he owned a Supreme Court justice.

• Chief Justice John Roberts:

• Holds stock in two corporations that would receive over $2 billion in tax savings if the Court strikes down the repatriation tax, giving him a clear financial incentive to decide in the Moores’ favor.

All four justices must recuse themselves based on blatant conflicts of interest in a case that stands to enrich themselves and their billionaire benefactors. Add your name now!