The Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee canceled for a third time a scheduled vote on issuing subpoenas against two private citizens connected to conservative Supreme Court justices.
Democrats, who accuse the court of being overly sympathetic to business interests and conservative causes, had been pressing for such a code for some time. Committee Chairman Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who has been sharply critical of the court, and particularly of Justice Clarence Thomas’s relationship with affluent Republicans, welcomed the code.
“I’m still reviewing the Court’s new code of conduct,” he said on Nov. 13.
“For now, I will note that the Court’s adoption of this code marks a step in the right direction. It may fall short of the ethical standards which other federal judges are held to, and that’s unacceptable. And if it falls short, the American people will ultimately have the last word, and the integrity of the Court is at issue.”
The justices are “certainly being influenced by the Democrats’ concerted attacks on the Supreme Court,” attorney Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, a conservative legal advocacy nonprofit, told The Epoch Times.
Democrats continue to promote their proposed Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023, which the committee narrowly approved on July 20. It’s unclear when the full Senate will vote on the legislation.
The bill, which Republicans denounce as unconstitutional, would create a system allowing members of the public to file complaints against justices for violating the code of conduct or for engaging “in conduct that undermines the integrity of the Supreme Court of the United States.” Among other things, it would also impose mandatory recusal standards and create a panel of lower court judges who would investigate complaints against the Supreme Court.
The committee was to have voted on authorization for subpoenas for Republican donor Harlan Crow and conservative activist Leonard Leo in connection with the committee’s Supreme Court ethics investigation.
Mr. Crow is a close friend of Justice Thomas and has given him expensive gifts, including vacations. No evidence has come forward that the justice’s vote in any case before the court has been influenced by Mr. Crow’s personal generosity toward him. While Justice Thomas has said he was advised he didn’t have to report the gifts, he has vowed to do so going forward.
Mr. Leo is chairman of The Federalist Society, a lawyers’ group that favors adherence to the Constitution and that has pushed conservative, constitutionalist nominees for the bench. A committee statement described Mr. Leo as an “orchestrator of right-wing influence campaigns around the Supreme Court.”
The committee had also sought a subpoena against Robin Arkley II, but on Nov. 8, Mr. Durbin said the panel wouldn’t vote on subpoena authorization against him because he “provided the committee with information that he had been withholding.”
Mr. Arkley is a conservative donor who’s president and CEO of the Security National Master Holding Co., a mortgage company.
Republicans say Democrats—many of whom want to pack the Supreme Court with liberal justices—only want to move against the court because its six-member conservative-leaning majority has been handing down decisions that they find objectionable.
Three of those six justices were appointed by President Donald Trump, a Republican.
The Nov. 16 committee vote was canceled “due to [continuing resolution] votes and wrap-up happening last night,” a committee spokesperson told The Epoch Times.
The Senate approved a continuing resolution, a stopgap funding measure, late on Nov. 15, joining the House, which had previously approved the resolution. The measure prevents a government shutdown and allows the government to continue operating. Some programs are funded until January and others until February. President Joe Biden is expected to sign the resolution.
A new date for the committee vote on the subpoenas hasn’t been scheduled. The committee generally holds votes every Thursday when the Senate is in session. That suggests that the vote may take place on Nov. 30.
The effort at getting the subpoenas out the door has been filled with drama.
Nov. 16 was the committee’s third attempt to vote on the subpoenas. On Nov. 9, Mr. Durbin abruptly called off the vote scheduled for that day without immediately explaining why. Later in the day, in a statement, he blamed “scheduling issues” for the cancelation of the markup.
Between the cancelation and Mr. Durbin’s release, a Senate aide speaking on anonymity said the vote was called off because Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) decided to oppose the subpoenas. Hours later, his spokesperson denied the report, saying Sen. Ossoff hadn’t stopped supporting authorization for the subpoenas.
The calling off of the meeting means votes on three of President Biden’s judicial nominations, along with a nomination to the Department of Justice, have also been postponed.
The three judicial nominees are Seth Robert Aframe, to be a Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit; Edward Sunyol Kiel, to be a U.S. District Judge for the District of New Jersey; and Sarah French Russell, to be a U.S. District Judge for the District of Connecticut.
The other postponed nomination is that of Christopher Charles Fonzone, to be an Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.
