Thursday's Senate Judiciary hearing was truly astonishing. Democrats played procedural games in an attempt to silence Republicans on the Committee, voted to send radical judicial nominees to the Senate floor, and authorized subpoenas against Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow—marking a new chapter in the Democrats' witch hunt against conservative Supreme Court Justices.Read more
Public faith in our core institutions matters – at least some think so. We’ve heard ad nauseam about the dangers of questioning election integrity since 2020. However, the Democrat Party is silent regarding the importance of sustaining faith in the Supreme Court. Worse than silent, because Democrat politicians themselves are the source of the attacks. Earlier this week, the Supreme Court announced the creation of an ethics code that all Justices have agreed to adhere to. Despite this, many Democrats like Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin don't think that's enough to fulfill their demands for unworkable "ethics" standards.Read more
Thursday's much-anticipated Senate Judiciary hearing adjourned without voting on the issuance of subpoenas regarding Senate Democrats' witch hunt against conservative Supreme Court Justices under the guise of so-called "ethics" concerns. National Review reported:
The Democratic-chaired committee submitted subpoenas for Republican donor Harlan Crow and lawyer Leonard Leo, in relation to an ethics investigation into Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Both Thomas and Alito are under fire for allegedly failing to report hospitality and travel gifts in their annual financial disclosures.Read more
Democrats continue to show that they have different standards for the conduct of conservative versus liberal Supreme Court Justices. Senate Democrats are demanding that Justice Alito recuse himself from certain future cases because he has spoken out against the dangerous Supreme Court "ethics" legislation currently making its way through the Senate. However, it is apparently acceptable for liberal Justice Elena Kagan to essentially speak in support of the same bill. National Review reported:
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats sent a letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Thursday demanding that he force Justice Samuel Alito to recuse himself from any future cases involving efforts to regulate the high Court, citing Alito’s public defense of the Court’s independence from Congressional oversight as disqualifying. Shortly after the letter was sent, Justice Elena Kagan publicly weighed in on the debate in the other direction, defending the right of Congress to check the Supreme Court. . .Read more
On Thursday, Senate Democrats led by conspiracy enthusiast Sheldon Whitehouse and Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin will take the next step in its quest to reshape the judiciary by holding a Committee vote on the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act. Because the radical Left doesn't like some of the decisions made since Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joined the Court, they have manufactured a crisis to provide cover for their attacks on the legitimacy of the Court. As Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell pointed out in remarks on the Senate floor last week:
The Supreme Court is not in crisis when it refuses to reliably and predictably advance Democrats’ priorities. The Court is not in crisis when it puts the text of our laws above politics.Read more
Yesterday’s Senate Judiciary “Supreme Court Ethics Reform” hearing had three Senators who took the spotlight, representing the good, the bad, and the ugly.
The good was Republican Senator John Kennedy who totally destroyed Democrat witness Kedric Payne of the Campaign Legal Center.
Senator Kennedy slams the biased Twitter posts of a key witness, who called some justices "politicians in robes who thrive in a system where access and influence are for sale" and said Chief Justice John Roberts was "a disgrace." pic.twitter.com/6DLEXqf1oW— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023
Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin, the Democrat Party, and their media sycophants have been trying to build a case against Republican-appointed Supreme Court Justices leading up to Durbin’s "Supreme Court Ethics Reform" hearing on Tuesday. This is part of the Democrats' long term effort to undermine the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, but the reality is it may be undermining Durbin’s legitimacy.
First off, it is worth noting that all nine Supreme Court Justices pushed back against the Durbin’s efforts:
All nine justices, in a rare step, on Tuesday released a joint statement reaffirming their voluntary adherence to a general code of conduct but rebutting proposals for independent oversight, mandatory compliance with ethics rules and greater transparency in cases of recusal.
The implication, though not expressly stated, is that the court unanimously rejects legislation proposed by Democrats seeking to impose on the justices the same ethics obligations applied to all other federal judges. . . .
"If the full Court or any subset of the Court were to review the recusal decisions of individual justices," they wrote, "it would create an undesirable situation in which the Court could affect the outcome of a case by selecting who among its members may participate."
Later, they added that public disclosure of the basis for recusal could "encourage strategic behavior by lawyers who may seek to prompt recusals in future cases" by framing them a certain way in an attempt to disqualify a particular member of the court.Read more
Earlier today, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's nomination to the Supreme Court received a tie vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee. No Republicans voted in favor of the nomination.
News -- In a party-line vote, Senate Judiciary Committee deadlocks 11-11 on the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to SCOTUS.— Manu Raju (@mkraju) April 4, 2022
Next up: A vote tonight to discharge the nomination by full Senate. Simple majority is needed
Cloture vote: Thursday
Confirmation: Thursday or Friday
Republicans have questions about Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson's involvement in providing representation for terrorism suspects being held at the Guantánamo Bay military prison. As The Washington Free Beacon reported in February, Judge Jackson was involved in the litigation while working as a federal public defender and after she moved to private practice:
Jackson has portrayed her work for the detainees as that of a disinterested professional fulfilling an assignment. But a Washington Free Beacon review of court filings dating back to 2005 indicates that Jackson was deeply committed to equal treatment for accused terrorists. Her advocacy was zealous and often resembled ideological cause lawyering, even in her capacity as a public defender. At times, she flirted with unsubstantiated left-wing theories that were debunked by government investigators. On other occasions, she accused Justice Department lawyers of egregious misconduct with little evidence.Read more