Oral arguments will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday in a case involving a federal judge’s temporary ban on a breed of genetically-modified alfalfa developed by Monsanto Co. One of the court’s justices, Stephen Breyer, has recused himself due to conflict of interest, and some environmental advocates are questioning if Justice Clarence Thomas, a former attorney for Monsanto, should also step aside.

The case, Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, is basically an appeal of two lower court rulings against Monsanto.

Monsanto wants the nation’s highest court to determine whether the lower court erred in three specific aspects of the National Environmental Policy Act when deciding the case. If the court sides with Monsanto, the threshold compelling government agencies to complete and publicly distribute environmental impact statements will be greatly reduced.

If the court sides with the respondents, government agencies will be put on notice that environmental law, as written, requires full public disclosure prior to deregulation of a product.

When the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear the case, Justice Stephen Breyer recused himself due to the fact that his brother, Charles Breyer, was the judge who ruled in the originating decision. Advocates for maintaining, if not strengthening, environmental protection laws are quick to point to one other member of the court who should also consider stepping aside on the case: Justice Clarence Thomas.