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!

British High Court orders death of baby girl after preventing her parents from taking her to Italy for treatment



Britain's High Court effectively executed a sick 8-month-old girl early Monday morning.

Dean Gregory and Claire Staniforth of Derbyshire fought desperately in recent weeks to see that their daughter, Indi Gregory, would continue receiving treatment for her mitochondrial disorder or potentially undergo experimental treatment abroad so that they could spend more time with her.

Hope came in the form of support from Italy, not just from the Vatican but from the government, which gave Gregory citizenship and paved the way for her to be treated at the Vatican's Bambino Gesu Children's Hospital in Rome.

Despite international pressure, a fully comped alternative, and the parents' desperate pleas, England's High Court determined that Gregory would be better off dead sooner rather than later.

— (@)

Indi Gregory was born on February 24 with a rare degenerative mitochondrial disease that saps energy.

The staff at Queen's Medical Center in Nottingham recently decided to give up on helping the girl and sought to take her off life support, noting that death was in the girl's best interests, reported the BBC.

High Court Justice Robert Peel granted the medical center's application to stop life support in October, suggesting that despite the parents' moving "belief in Indi's resilience, courage, and fortitude," the medical evidence justifying termination was "unanimous and clear."

Peel's ruling cleared the way for the physicians' plan to wean the girl off of intubation and let her die, "at home or at a hospice."

Gregory's parents were evidently unwilling to let a London judge and some masked strangers determine the fate of their daughter.

"The doctors painted a terribly bleak and negative picture of Indi's condition during court proceedings," said the girl's father. "Indi can definitely experience happiness. She cries like a normal baby. ... We know she is disabled, but you don't just let disabled people die. We just want to give her a chance."

With the backing of the British advocacy group Christian Concern, Gregory and Staniforth made repeated attempts to have their little girl moved to a hospital that might actually try to keep her alive. The parents attempted to persuade Court of Appeal judges in London as well as judges at the European Court of Human Rights in France to overturn the fatal decision, reported the Telegraph.

Italy ultimately intervened, granting Gregory citizenship on Nov. 6 and agreeing to cover the cost of Indi's medical treatment at the Vatican's pediatric hospital. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni pledged to do what she could to "defend her life" and pressured Britain's lord chancellor to help facilitate the girl's transfer to Rome.

Simone Pillon, a lawyer and former senator who helped secure a spot for Indi Gregory at the Vatican hospital, said in a statement, "A place is ready and waiting for Indi at a leading paediatric hospital, which will be funded by the Italian government. I hope there will be no further delay in the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust cooperating with the specialist Air Ambulance Service and to work with the family rather than cruelly denying them this chance."

On Thursday, the girl's Italian guardian, the consul in Manchester, Matteo Corradini, reportedly made a plea to the U.K. High Court, calling on Justice Robert Peel to cede the case to him under Article Article 9§2 of the 1996 Hague Convention.

The next day, the High Court ruled that the Italian efforts to save the child from the British health care system were "wholly misconceived" and that the baby's life support had to be removed "immediately," reported the Catholic News Agency.

Dean Gregory responded to the ruling, saying, "Claire and I are again disgusted by another one-sided decision from the judges and the Trust. The whole world is watching and is shocked at how we have been treated."

"This feels like the latest kick in the teeth, and we will not give up fighting for our daughter's chance to live until the end," added Gregory.

Justices Peter Jackson, Eleanor King, and Andrew Moylan all denied the distraught parents the ability to appeal the ruling, thereby sealing Indi Gregory's fate.

On Sunday, Christian Concern indicated that the baby had been transferred from Queen's Medical Care Center to a hospice, apparently with a security escort and police presence.

Indi had been moved to a hospice as opposed to home because Justice Peel reneged on his earlier order last Wednesday.

"Indi's life ended at 01:45. Claire and I are angry, heartbroken and ashamed," said Dean Gregory. "The NHS and the courts not only took away her chance to live a longer life, but they also took away Indi's dignity to pass away in the family home where she belonged."

"They did succeed in taking Indi's body and dignity, but they can never take her soul. They tried to get rid of Indi without anybody knowing, but we made sure she would be remembered forever. I knew she was special from the day she was born," added Gregory.

The grieving father indicated that Indi ultimately passed in her mother's arms.

While not religious, Dean Gregory had Indi baptized in September, telling an Italian newspaper, "When I was in court, I felt as if hell pulled at me."

"I thought that if hell exists, then heaven must exist too," said the father, noting he wanted his daughter to go to heaven.

Parents ‘heartbroken’ as baby Indi Gregory dies following failed legal battleyoutu.be

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

'Great day for American Jurisprudence!' Celebrities hail the confirmation of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court



Various celebrities celebrated the confirmation of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, expressing their excitement on social media.

The Senate vote was 53-47 — Republican Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Susan Collins of Maine voted in favor of confirming Jackson to the high court, while the rest of the GOP senators voted against confirmation. In June, 2021, Romney voted against confirming Jackson to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Jackson, who will replace Justice Stephen Breyer once he retires later this year, will be the first black woman ever to serve on the Supreme Court. Her prescence will not shift the 6-3 balance of the nine-member court, which is currently comprised of three justices nominated by Democratic presidents and six justices nominated by Republican presidents.

Celebrities expressed their enthusiasm about Jackson's confirmation.

"Congratulation to JUSTICE Ketanji Brown Jackson on her elevation to the nation’s highest court. Well deserved, and well past time," George Takei tweeted.

"There have been 115 Supreme Court Justices, but there has never before been a Black woman appointed to the highest court of the land. Until now…and my heart swells! Congratulations, Justice Jackson," Alyssa Milano remarked.

"I mean…LOT OF BAD GOIN ON SO LET’S TAKE THIS HISTORIC WIN TODAY AND ENJOY IT," Kathy Griffin tweeted.

"History," Ben Stiller tweeted, along with several raised-hands emojis.

History https://twitter.com/sensherrodbrown/status/1512132628224294914\u00a0\u2026
— Ben Stiller (@Ben Stiller) 1649355654

"Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson," Padma Lakshmi tweeted. "History is made! What a proud day for our country."

"Great day for American Jurisprudence! One of the most qualified people in Supreme Court history takes her rightful place on the bench. Congratulations Judge, now Justice, Jackson," Rob Reiner tweeted.

Reiner, an outspoken liberal, tweeted last week that "It’s long past time that we acknowledge the sure handed, effective, grace under fire, success of Joe Biden’s Presidency." While he made the post on April Fools' Day, considering his openly liberal leanings, he was not joking.

Jackson has noted that she does not have a position on the issue of whether people have natural rights.

"I do not hold a position on whether individuals possess natural rights," the jurist wrote in response to a written question from Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

During a Senate Judiciary Committee nomination hearing last month, GOP Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana asked Jackson when she believes that life begins.

"I don't know," Jackson said. She noted that she has "a religious view" on the topic which she puts aside while making rulings.

Kennedy asked Jackson, "when does equal protection of the laws attach ... to a human being?"

Jackson told the lawmaker, "I actually don't know the answer to that question. I'm sorry."