Senate Democrats to bring up Supreme Court ethics bill amid new revelations

Washington – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin will attempt to unanimously pass legislation Wednesday that would require the Supreme Court to adopt binding ethics rules amid recent press reports examining Justice Samuel Alito.

Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, plans to ask for unanimous consent to pass the legislation on Wednesday night, meaning it could be blocked by opposition from just a single lawmaker. Republicans will almost certainly oppose it.

The bill, introduced by Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, would require the Supreme Court to adopt a binding code of conduct and implement a mechanism to investigate alleged violations of ethics rules and other laws. It would also require the high court to impose stricter rules on the disclosure of gifts, travel and income received by judges and their legal assistants.

The proposal cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote last July, but it was not brought to the floor for a vote, given widespread opposition from Republicans.

Whitehouse launched the legislation last year following a report from the media outlet ProPublica that Detailed travels Judge Clarence Thomas took with a Republican megadonor, Harlan Crow, who he failed to report on his financial disclosures.

Supreme Court Ethics

The revelations increased pressure on the Supreme Court to unilaterally adopt formal ethics rules, what the judges did in November. But the code announced by the high court does not include an enforcement mechanism.

Scrutiny of ethical practices at the Supreme Court had largely calmed until recently, when the New York Times revealed that an inverted American flag was flown outside Alito’s Virginia residence in January 2021, and an “Appeal to Heaven” flag was flown outside his New Jersey vacation home last summer.

Both types of flags were carried by protesters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, and have been associated with the “Stop the Steal” movement.

Alito said in a letter to Durbin and Whitehouse that the flags were raised by his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, and said that neither of them knew the meaning attached to them. The judge said the inverted American flag was raised at a time when Martha-Ann Alito was involved in a neighborhood dispute in which he was not involved. Alito also said his wife did not fly the “Call to Heaven” flag, which dates back to the American Revolution, to associate with any group.

Alito was also secretly recorded by a liberal filmmaker at an event held at the high court earlier this month, where it was discussed whether it would be possible for the ideological opponents to reach a compromise. The audio was posted on social media.

“One side or the other will win. I don’t know,” he told filmmaker Lauren Windsor, who pretended to be a conservative Catholic. “There may be a way to work, a way to live together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences in fundamental things that really can’t be compromised.”

Meanwhile, Thomas included in your last financial disclosure form an amendment to his 2019 report that listed two trips taken with Crow to Indonesia and California. The judge said he received food and lodging. The information was “inadvertently omitted at the time of filing,” his report said.

The publicized recording of Alito and Thomas’ trips with Crow amplified the political backlash surrounding the two justices and the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority.

Durbin’s measure also comes in a context of pressure from the left to take action in response to the ethical controversies that have worsened in recent weeks, with new energy behind measures to force recusals among judges and impose enforcement mechanisms for the new code of conduct of the high court. But Senate Democrats have faced fierce opposition in their efforts at every step, amid concerns about the separation of power between the two branches of government.

The Supreme Court is reaching the end of its current term and is set to deliver important decisions about guns, abortion, and federal regulatory power. It will also decide whether former President Donald Trump is entitled to broad immunity from federal prosecution for allegedly official acts that occurred while he was in office.

Democrats asked Alito to recuse himself from that case and another involving the Justice Department’s use of a federal obstruction law against the Jan. 6 defendants, and the judge refused to step aside.