16-year-old linked to 121 car break-ins in 1 night released after 5 hours in custody. Police chief decries 'broken system.'



A Maryland police chief decried what he called a "broken system" after a 16-year-old male arrested in connection with 121 car break-ins in one night earlier this month was released after just five hours in custody.

Police in Laurel said the male and two other teens smashed car windows and stole items from 54 cars in Laurel and 67 more in Prince George's, Anne Arundel, and Howard Counties on the night of May 4, WRC-TV reported.

'I had one woman stop me and mention to me that this is the third time this has happened to her car. And because the deductible was so high, she had to make adjustments in her home, including the purchase of food.'

Police arrested the 16-year-old on Wednesday morning, the station said, but just five hours later, police were forced to release him.

"He was released back into the community, back into the environment that allowed him to be out roaming the streets in all of these counties late at night and in the early morning," Laurel Police Chief Russ Hamill told WRC.

The State's Attorney's Office supported detectives' intention to hold the teen, but the Department of Juvenile Services shot that down, saying the young suspect didn't have a prior record, and the crimes weren't violent, Hamill added to the station.

RELATED: Video: Entitled female hits cop with car, drives down closed street because she has to 'go to work.' Bad idea.

"We don't do this lightly. We don't ask for young people to be held on a whim. We do so to help protect the community and them," the chief also told WRC. "I have little hope there will be further accountability for him due to this broken system."

Blaze News on Friday morning asked a Department of Juvenile Services spokesperson if the agency had any comment on Hamill's "broken system" declaration, but the spokesperson told Blaze News that "laws in place preclude our ability to talk about individual cases at all."

Hamill told WRC that video from May 4 shows two suspects walk from car to car in a parking lot and use flashlights to search inside and that a third suspect is seen nearby driving a stolen car in case they need to make a getaway.

"They were just simply going through neighborhoods and targets of opportunity, breaking into cars," Hamill added to the station. "If there was something in there, they'd steal. If there was nothing in there, they'd move to another car."

More from WRC:

Investigators found the keys to the stolen car and keys to 25 other cars during a search warrant at the 16-year-old suspect's home in Beltsville, police said. They also found several stolen items, police said.

Hamill said although some might consider car break-ins a lower-level crime, they greatly affect the victims, who often have to pay hundreds of dollars on their insurance deductibles and miss work because they don't have a useable car.

RELATED: Illegal immigrant arrested in connection with stabbing released from custody after paperwork went unfiled — then he allegedly committed a murder

"I had one woman stop me and mention to me that this is the third time this has happened to her car," Hamill told the station. "And because the deductible was so high, she had to make adjustments in her home, including the purchase of food."

Laurel police on Friday morning told Blaze News that the two other juvenile suspects wanted in connection with the car break-ins were arrested for unrelated crimes in other jurisdictions.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Congress Must Use Every Tool At Its Disposal To Uncover Biden DementiaGate Cover-Up

A constitutional law expert says Trump should do what Biden did: waive executive privilege to release Biden White House records.

'I think he's guilty of treason': Trump orders investigation into former deep-stater, 'Anonymous' official



President Donald Trump signed a pair of executive orders on Wednesday directing his administration to suspend security clearances for a pair of antagonistic officials who served in his first administration.

In addition to severing Miles Taylor and Christopher Krebs from the fount of insider federal knowledge, Trump has directed the relevant authorities in his administration to "take all appropriate action to review" the duo's activities while still government employees.

Trump characterized Krebs, the former head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, in his order as a "significant bad-faith actor who weaponized and abused his Government" and engaged in "abusive conduct."

"Krebs' misconduct involved the censorship of disfavored speech implicating the 2020 election and COVID-19 pandemic," wrote Trump. "CISA, under Krebs' leadership, suppressed conservative viewpoints under the guise of combatting supposed disinformation, and recruited and coerced major social media platforms to further its partisan mission. CISA covertly worked to blind the American public to the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop."

The president suggested further that while running the show at CISA, Krebs — a former Microsoft executive who has made no secret of his contempt for Trump and served as a key witness for the Democratic Jan. 6 select committee — promoted the suppression of information about "risks associated with certain voting practices" and "baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen."

Trump announced Krebs' termination via tweet on Nov. 17, 2020, days after CISA distributed a statement asserting both that "the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history" and that "there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised."

Krebs was portrayed in heroic terms and as a tragic figure by Democrats and other leftists. California Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D), for instance, lauded Krebs for supposedly "speaking truth to power and rejecting Trump's constant campaign of election falsehoods."

'Identify any instances where Krebs' conduct appears to have been contrary to suitability standards for Federal employees.'

Krebs, who went on to call the president a "wannabe tyrant," responded to his termination on X, writing, "We did it right."

Trump has tasked Attorney General Pam Bondi and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem with determining whether Krebs in fact "did it right," directing them to "identify any instances where Krebs' conduct appears to have been contrary to suitability standards for Federal employees, involved the unauthorized dissemination of classified information, or contrary to the purposes and policies identified in Executive Order 14149 of January 20, 2025 (Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship)."

While Trump painted Krebs as a censorious hack potentially guilty of misonduct, he told reporters in the Oval Office Thursday that Taylor might be "guilty of treason" — a potential death-penalty offense.

Taylor served in the Trump DHS from 2017 to 2019. During that time, the former DHS chief of staff worked to undermine the democratically elected president and to "thwart parts of his agenda." Taylor admitted doing so in an anonymous piece in the New York Times titled "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration."

In the article, Taylor suggested that he and others undermining the administration from within were the "steady state" and were committed to "steer[ing] the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it's over."

After leaving the Trump administration, Taylor penned a book — again hiding behind the cloak of anonymity — attacking Trump. At the time, the Trump White House called the book, which is replete with disputed claims, "a work of fiction" written by a "coward."

Prior to the 2020 election, Taylor finally revealed his identity, then endorsed Joe Biden for president.

"I barely remember him. Somebody that went out and wrote a book and said all sorts of terrible things that were all lies," Trump told reporters Wednesday.

'Taylor abandoned his sacred oath.'

"He wrote a book, '[A Warning:] Anonymous,' and I always thought it was terrible," said Trump. "Now we have a chance to find out whether or not it was terrible. But it was a work of fiction."

"I think we have to do something about it," Trump added. "If that happens to other presidents, it wouldn't be sustainable for other presidents. I seem to be able to sustain, but if that happened to other presidents, it's just unfair."

— (@)

In his executive order, Trump noted, "Miles Taylor was entrusted with the solemn responsibility of Federal service, but instead prioritized his own ambition, personal notoriety, and monetary gain over fidelity to his constitutional oath."

"He illegally published classified conversations to sell his book under the pseudonym 'Anonymous,' which is full of falsehoods and fabricated stories," continued Trump. "In so doing, Taylor abandoned his sacred oath and commitment to public service by disclosing sensitive information obtained through unauthorized methods and betrayed the confidence of those with whom he served."

Trump noted further that the improper disclosure of sensitive information for the "purposes of personal enrichment and undermining our foreign policy, national security, and Government effectiveness" could "properly be characterized as treasonous and as possibly violating the Espionage Act."

Taylor tweeted Wednesday, "Dissent isn't unlawful. It certainly isn't treasonous. America is headed down a dark path."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

High-trust societies die when people don't trust their neighbors



In a better world, people would cultivate virtue and develop habits of right action, practicing them regardless of external pressures. But we don’t live in that world. For most, concepts like honor and morality emerge from community, not individual will. These vital, pro-social behaviors rely on constant reinforcement by others. When daily life consists of anonymous, disconnected interactions, it becomes easier to justify selfishness. But when people must live among and depend on those who observe and remember how they behave, accountability shapes conduct.

Social norms depend heavily on the expectation of repeated interactions — what game theorists call “iterated games.” A functioning society requires widespread cooperation. When people believe they benefit more by acting selfishly than by cooperating, social cohesion begins to unravel. In one-time interactions, the incentive to cheat or defect rises sharply. One can gain an immediate advantage with little risk of social or material consequences.

Many debate distant acquaintances online, try to enforce shared principles across cultural divides, and appeal to ‘common sense’ in a world where little remains common.

Carnival workers and traveling merchants were once known for scamming customers. Sailors and touring rock musicians were infamous for defiling the honor of the daughters of the town. These groups operated without accountability because they never had to face the communities they affected. Their minimal connection to others reduced the costs of antisocial behavior and encouraged defection.

Today, we see a broader breakdown of communal life. We’ve fragmented communities, commodified identity, and isolated individuals. In doing so, we’ve eroded shared moral standards and stripped away even the basic incentives to cultivate virtue.

As a colleague recently observed, communal gatherings used to serve as informal “wellness checks.” Church, for example, grounded both cultural norms and moral expectations. It also required people to present themselves before others. Even atheists or agnostics often showed up on Sunday mornings — not for faith but to signal solidarity and demonstrate their role as contributing members of the community.

Churches noticed what others missed. Underfed or unwashed children caught someone’s eye. A hungover woman felt the weight of disapproval. An unfaithful man encountered the quiet judgment of those around him. These small acts of social accountability reinforced a shared moral order.

For most of history, individual independence was difficult, if not impossible. People relied on their communities for safety, food, education, goods, and entertainment. In many ancient societies, exile was tantamount to a death sentence. Some preferred suicide to being cast out. Reputation and honor mattered more than money because survival depended on others’ trust. A man’s worth reflected the number of relationships he had managed honorably over time.

Today, people can meet most of their basic needs without relying on others. That shift creates the illusion of freedom, but in reality, it has replaced dependence on community with dependence on the state.

Now, instead of interacting face-to-face within tight-knit communities, we operate as isolated individuals within anonymous digital spaces. Functions once performed by churches and neighborhoods have shifted to malls and bureaucracies. But social correction — once a communal responsibility — has become taboo. Attempting to help or intervene risks public shaming as a so-called "Karen" on social media.

The best social worker, no matter how dedicated, cannot match the quiet authority of vigilant grandmothers. And as that kind of local, relational accountability fades, the consequences grow harder to ignore.

A shared religion and common cultural norms significantly increase the likelihood that people will cooperate and act ethically, even among strangers. This dynamic defines what we call a “high-trust” society — one where individuals expect cooperation and moral behavior from others, even without close, day-to-day interaction.

In such societies, cultural expectations and religious beliefs so deeply shape conduct that people often can’t imagine behaving any other way. Even when defection carries few immediate consequences, trust persists because moral behavior has been internalized through habit and community values.

This is why most successful civilizations develop around a unifying religion and dominant cultural framework. A shared moral and social code allows complex societies to function by making behavior more predictable. Without that foundation, everyday interactions become unreliable, and cooperation breaks down.

Still, this model has its limits. Problems arise when a society continues to assume widespread agreement on values long after the cultural or religious foundation has eroded. Without a clear basis for those norms — or mechanisms to enforce them — shared assumptions collapse. The result isn’t cohesion but confusion, fragmentation, and in many cases, failure.

Social norms draw their power from habit and community enforcement. Religious precepts gain strength by asserting transcendent truths. Strip away both, and the incentive to cooperate weakens dramatically.

This is why the popular secular call to “just be a good person” falls flat. What does it mean to be good, in what context, and to what end? Only deep-rooted moral traditions, developed over time within specific communities, can answer those questions with any clarity or authority. When pressure mounts, the only forces that reliably foster cooperation are interdependence, strong communal accountability, or a belief in higher truths — all of which arise from tight-knit communities. Attempts to universalize these concepts without those foundations always collapse in the end.

As Americans confront the consequences of open borders and increasing social isolation, questions of national identity have become more urgent. We’re told Americans value liberty and hard work — and while that’s true, it’s not enough. Many debate distant acquaintances online, try to enforce shared principles across cultural divides, and appeal to “common sense” in a world where little remains common.

To recover a meaningful national identity, we need to rebuild on the foundations of Christian faith and real, local community. Neighbors must be able to depend on one another and hold each other accountable. That’s a tall order in a digital age where every device offers an escape from responsibility. But those willing to embrace that challenge will be the ones most equipped to lead.

Dems loved IRS audits for you — and now fear accountability for themselves



As promised during the election, Elon Musk was appointed head of the Department of Government Efficiency to combat government waste and fraud. In typical Washington fashion, such an initiative would normally produce a polished report after 18 months, with little real action. But Musk and his team have taken a different approach, actively dismantling the worst areas of taxpayer abuse in a matter of weeks.

Predictably, those who oppose real reform — including Musk’s critics, Trump’s enemies, and those losing access to their slush funds — are in full meltdown mode.

That’s the real crisis hurting working Americans; the middle and working class are the ones paying the price.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who has spent years in government overseeing this waste, took to Musk’s own platform, X, to express her outrage:

Elon Musk and Donald Trump are trying to drive a wrecking ball through our government. The people who will pay a real price are the hard-working families who are just trying to make it to the end of the month. We must use every tool to fight back.

That’s rich coming from Warren. Under the senator’s watch, the government’s debt has soared past 120% of GDP, nearing $36.5 trillion and climbing. In recent years, Congress has run wartime deficits of nearly 7% of GDP, fueling reckless spending. These policies helped drive historic inflation, crushing the finances and balance sheets of working Americans.

Warren knows all about wrecking balls — because that’s exactly what government policies have done to the nation’s finances while she has been in office.

That’s the real crisis hurting working Americans; the middle and working class are the ones paying the price.

So what exactly is Warren “fighting back” against? The same business-as-usual policies that are driving Americans and the government toward a fiscal cliff? Calls for responsibility and transparency? Efforts to root out fraud and waste?

If you love America, there’s nothing to fight against. Dismantling Congress’ “legal” money-laundering schemes is exactly what voters demanded. Americans want the wrecking ball aimed at government corruption — not at them, as has been the case throughout Warren’s time in office.

Democrats like Warren have pushed for more IRS agents and audits on $600 Venmo transactions. So why the panic when the government, which controls trillions of dollars, is finally put under a microscope?

Because Warren and company feel threatened that their power — and shenanigans — will be exposed.

Being “under new management,” as one of my X followers has called it, is a wrecking ball for the old regime, for corruption, for waste, and for fraud.

And it’s exactly what Americans want.

Why USAID is fighting Elon Musk’s DOGE — and what the left doesn’t want you to know



The left wants you to believe the U.S. Agency for International Development is a benevolent force — a humanitarian group dedicated to building schools, fighting disease, and spreading democracy. But history tells a different story. USAID has long served as a front for covert CIA operations, influencing foreign elections and even toppling governments that don’t align with U.S. interests.

Now, under scrutiny from the Department of Government Efficiency — a Trump-backed initiative led by Elon Musk to cut excess and corrupt government spending — USAID has responded with fierce resistance. What is it hiding?

The administrative state operates beyond voter control and congressional oversight. And now, for the first time, an outsider with real power is demanding to see the books.

Last weekend, USAID’s director of security, John Voorhees, and his deputy, Brian McGill, were placed on administrative leave after refusing to grant DOGE access to USAID’s security systems, classified personnel files, and intelligence networks.

Think about that: an “aid organization” treating transparency as a national security threat.

What kind of humanitarian work requires classified intelligence? What kind of aid needs protection from the very government that funds it? The answer is clear — USAID isn’t just an aid organization. It’s an extension of the intelligence apparatus, operating in the shadows with billions of taxpayer dollars at its disposal.

A long history of covert operations

This isn’t conspiracy theory. This is historical fact. Since its founding in 1961, USAID has funneled money into foreign student groups, cultural programs, and agricultural projects — all serving as covers for intelligence-gathering and regime-change operations.

From Latin America to Eastern Europe, USAID has been accused of influencing elections and engineering revolutions under the guise of “democracy promotion.”

USAID played a key role in the notorious “color revolutions,” orchestrated covert arms transfers in the Middle East, funneled money to Afghan warlords, propped up Hamas in Gaza, and armed opposition groups in Syria — all while selling the American people the lie that their tax dollars were building wells and feeding children.

Why the establishment fears DOGE

Federal agencies like USAID that have metastasized into unaccountable, corrupt entities fear DOGE because Elon Musk is doing more than just “balancing the budget” — he’s threatening to dismantle the power structures that have allowed agencies like USAID to operate unchecked for decades.

Musk, an industry-disruptor by nature, is looking under the hood of America’s covert operations, and the entrenched bureaucracy is terrified. That’s why USAID is resisting transparency with every tool at its disposal.

If DOGE gains full access, it won’t just expose waste — it will expose decades of covert operations, intelligence overreach, and corruption that has cost American taxpayers billions.

The battle for control

This isn’t about bureaucracy. This is about who runs the country. The administrative state, the “fourth branch of government,” operates beyond voter control and congressional oversight. It decides who gets to know what, both in America and abroad. And now, for the first time, an outsider with real power is demanding to see the books.

Think about who has run USAID historically. Samantha Power, an Obama-era bureaucrat whose husband co-authored “Nudge,” a book about manipulating public behavior, was in charge of shaping USAID into the organization it is today. Do you think she was just funding schools in Africa? Or was she helping steer foreign governments in a direction that served the interests of a hidden power structure?

Power is the ultimate example of the revolving door between so-called humanitarian efforts and deep-state manipulation. She wielded influence far beyond humanitarian aid, engaging in covert operations that shaped political outcomes worldwide. And now, her legacy continues to influence USAID’s resistance to oversight.

What happens next?

If Trump and Musk break through this wall, it would set a precedent that no part of the government is beyond scrutiny. The intelligence community will lose one of its key tools for clandestine influence. The American people might finally see how much of their money has gone to secret operations and regime-change efforts under the guise of humanitarian projects.

The media will try to bury this story under the latest celebrity scandal or political outrage. Don’t let them. Ask questions. Why does an aid organization need classified intelligence? Why is transparency a threat to democracy? Most importantly, remember that the loudest defenders of “democracy” are often the ones most afraid of real accountability.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Coalition of state AGs seek to bypass Biden pardon and hold Fauci accountable



Just hours before leaving office, former President Joe Biden issued a pardon for Anthony Fauci, giving the fifth director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases a pass for possible federal crimes going back to Jan. 1, 2014 — around the time the Obama administration supposedly halted funding for dangerous gain-of-function research.

While Biden's stated intention was to spare the 84-year-old immunologist from "being investigated or prosecuted," the geriatric Democrat could not ultimately spare Fauci from being held accountable for possible violations of state laws.

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson and 16 other state attorneys general have launched an investigation into Fauci's role in the COVID-19 pandemic response, "demanding accountability for alleged mismanagement, misleading statements, and suppression of scientific debate."

After referencing damning findings by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic concerning Fauci, the attorneys general urged House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) in a letter Wednesday to "consider using all available tools" at Congress' disposal to "ensure that former President Biden's shameful pardon does not frustrate accountability."

The state attorneys general evidently have one particular "tool" in mind.

Underscoring that Biden's pardon does not "preclude state-level investigations or legal proceedings," they noted that members of Congress can refer pertinent findings to state officials who "possess the authority to address violations of state law or breaches of public trust."

'We are fully prepared to take appropriate action to ensure justice is served.'

"You are uniquely positioned to assist us by providing us with information that could outline potential courses of action under state law, should they exist," said the letter. "If possible, please furnish us with the necessary details so that we may make informed decisions aimed at holding malign actors accountable."

The congressional report cited in the letter found that:

  • Fauci got the ball rolling on the controversial paper "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" with the apparent aim of discrediting the lab leak theory, which is now widely regarded as the most likely explanation. Fauci may have wanted to push the zoonotic origin theory, not only to avoid blaming China for the pandemic but because his fingerprints were all over the alternative origin. After all, EcoHealth Alliance, whose subcontractor Ben Hu — the Wuhan Institute of Virology's lead on gain-of-function research on coronaviruses — was among the pandemic's suspected patients zero, used NIAID funding to collaborate with the Wuhan lab.
  • Fauci "played semantics with the definition of gain-of-function research" in an apparent effort to deceive federal lawmakers while testifying under oath. The report indicated that whereas Fauci stated on multiple occasions that the National Institutes of Health and NIAID had not funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, his "testimony was, at a minimum, misleading" as such research had been funded through EcoHealth Alliance.
  • The NIAID under Fauci "fostered an environment that promoted evading the Freedom of Information Act."
  • The NIAID failed to adequately oversee EcoHealth Alliance, with Fauci admitting that he signed off on grants without reviewing them.

The state attorneys general noted further that it is clear that Fauci also "led a deliberate campaign to stifle the voices of premier health scholars regarding the lack of adequate testing of vaccines" and engaged in a propaganda campaign that "contributed to serious vaccine injuries — and in some cases, death."

Federal lawmakers may soon get their hands on evidence of other possible causes for state action.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) announced on Jan. 27 that the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee subpoenaed 14 agencies in connection with the origins of COVID-19 and taxpayer-funded gain-of-function research.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) revealed the following day that he had "issued his first subpoena as chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations to the Department of Health and Human Services for records relating to COVID-19 vaccine safety data and communications about the COVID-19 pandemic, including a subset of Dr. Anthony Fauci's emails."

"President Biden's blanket pardon of Dr. Fauci is a shameful attempt to prevent accountability," Wilson said in a statement. "If any of these findings indicate violations of state laws, we are fully prepared to take appropriate action to ensure justice is served."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

5 Military Officials Whose Damaging Left-Wing Antics Must Be Accounted For

Mark Milley is one of several military officers who deserve accountability for the damage they've done to the force.

Judiciary nicely tells Democrats to pound sand — Justice Thomas will not be referred to DOJ



Democrats and their allies in the press have worked feverishly in recent years to neutralize conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito on the U.S. Supreme Court. Owing to the justices' resilience and the toothless nature of Democrats' attacks, these efforts have all been in vain — including the attempt by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) to have Thomas referred to the Department of Justice for imagined violations of the Ethics in Government Act 1978, which was thwarted Thursday by the Judicial Conference of the United States.

Thomas and his relatives reportedly sold an old single-story home and two vacant lots in Savannah, Georgia, at market rate to one of Texas billionaire Harlan Crow's companies in 2014. Crow, who has been Thomas' family friend for over two decades, said in a statement that his intention was to "one day create a public museum at the Thomas home dedicated to telling the story of our nation's second black Supreme Court Justice, who was born in Pin Point, Georgia and later raised in Savannah."

ProPublica — an investigative journalist outfit that has received donations from Laurene Powell Jobs and her leftist Emerson Collective, from George Soros' Foundation to Promote Open Society, and from Crankstart Foundation, Lincoln Project donor Michael Moritz's family foundation — published a report on April 13, 2023, suggesting that Thomas failed to disclose his family's sale of the property and may have violated a federal disclosure law in the process.

'Potential violations of disclosure laws by officers of the highest court merit serious investigation.'

ProPublica also made a fuss about the justice's inadvertent failure to note in financial filings that Crow provided him with food and lodging in 2019 at both an Indonesian hotel and at a private club that year in California. Thomas later noted these in his financial disclosure report for 2023.

Just as Democratic lawmakers would later use the New York Times strategic reports about flags to attack Justice Alito, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and Rep. Hank Johnson were quick to weaponize the ProPublica report, penning a letter to the Judicial Conference on April 14, 2023, requesting that it refer Thomas to Attorney General Merrick Garland for investigation.

The Democrats suggested that there was "reasonable cause to believe that Justice Thomas willfully failed to file information required to be reported under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978."

"Justice Thomas's failure to report this transaction is part of an apparent pattern of noncompliance with disclosure requirements," said the letter. "Potential violations of disclosure laws by officers of the highest court merit serious investigation, and it is well past time for the Supreme Court to align with the rest of the government on ethics requirements."

Coinciding with Whitehouse and Johnson's publication of their letter, the New York Times editorial board ran a condemnatory piece echoing both the scandal-plagued leftist group Fix the Court in calling the Supreme Court "the least accountable part of our government" and Democratic lawmakers in calling for the establishment of an ethics office at the high court.

The Democratic lawmakers received a reply this week after 20 months of waiting. Apparently unmoved by the the letter and the editorial in the Times, Judicial Conference secretary Robert Conrad Jr., an Article III federal judge with senior status on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, effectively told Whitehouse and Johnson that theirs is a nonissue and to pound sand.

Conrad noted in his Thursday letter that the judiciary's financial disclosure requirements have been in flux over the past few years.

For instance, in early 2023, the Financial Disclosure Committee issued guidance that the personal hospitality gift reporting exemption applies only to food, lodging, or entertainment — such as what was received by Thomas from Crow in 2019. As for disclosures regarding gifts of transportation, Conrad noted that the committee issued guidance in March 2023 precluding the need for retroactive application past 2022.

'The provision in fact contains a suggestion to the contrary.'

Conrad pointed out that Thomas "has filed amended financial disclosure statements that address several issues identified in your letter. In addition, he has agreed to follow the relevant guidance issued to other federal judges, which would include the guidance mentioned above. We have no reason to believe he has done anything less."

The secretary also indicated that it was not altogether clear whether the Judicial Conference's referral authority applies to justices of the Supreme Court, stating that "there is reason to doubt that the Conference has any such authority."

"Because the Judicial Conference does not superintend the Supreme Court and because any effort to grant the Conference such authority would raise serious constitutional questions, one would expect Congress at a minimum to state any such directive clearly," wrote Conrad. "But no such express directive appears in this provision. The provision in fact contains a suggestion to the contrary."

Conrad indicated not only that the Democrats' request might be legally unworkable but that it was moot on account of the lawmakers' direct appeal to Garland on July 3 to have a special counsel investigate these matters.

In a separate letter, the Judicial Conference shut down a similar request from the Center for Renewing America to refer Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the DOJ for failing to "disclose required information regarding her husband's medical malpractice consulting income for over a decade." Conrad noted that Jackson has amended her disclosure to include the previously omitted income from her husband.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!