Democrats hatch new plan to force reforms they want on Supreme Court: 'Use the power of the purse'



Democratic lawmakers may use the power of the purse to force reforms onto the Supreme Court.

Amid complaints of impropriety against Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch — none of which has been proved to be actually unethical or illegal — Senate Democrats are demanding that the Supreme Court reform its ethical code.

Despite the justices agreeing to abide by one — which Chief Justice John Roberts recently sent Senate Democrats — lawmakers critical of the court say it's not transparent enough. While all federal judges are bound by an ethical code of conduct, justices on the Supreme Court have their own, which they independently create and abide by.

But if the Supreme Court does not comply with demands for ethical reform, Senate Democrats may leverage their appropriations power to force the reform.

Specifically, lawmakers are exploring adding language to the court's appropriations bill that would compel justices "to adopt more stringent, transparent ethics rules, as well as procedures for enforcing those rules," The Hill reported.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), chairman of the Senate subcommittee that provides oversight of the court's budget, confirmed to The Hill that lawmakers are exploring "all the options."

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), the leading voice behind the effort, said the court itself has justified Congress using its budget power to compel other branches to act.

"There are court decisions that say very clearly that, in interbranch disputes, it is completely appropriate and proper for the legislative branch to use the power of the purse to influence the other branches in doing what they ought to be doing," Whitehouse told The Hill.

Anything else?

Last month, Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin invited Roberts to testify at a court hearing, which took place on Tuesday, on judicial ethics.

But Roberts did not attend, citing a concern that doing so would violate the separation of powers. Supreme Court justices have testified before Congress in rare instances only, Roberts told Durbin.

The decision further outraged Democrats.

"But make no mistake: Supreme Court ethics reform must happen whether the Court participates in the process or not," Durbin said in response. "It is time for Congress to accept its responsibility to establish an enforceable code of ethics for the Supreme Court, the only agency of our government without it."

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

No, Justice Clarence Thomas Doesn’t Have To Recuse Because His Wife Has Political Opinions

The unhinged nature of these smears also exposes the left’s racism, with their paternalistic views that a black man is dependent on his white wife for his thoughts.

Democrat challenges witness to prove claim that liberals 'hate' Clarence Thomas because he is a black conservative. Witness uses chairman's own words.



Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) received more than he bargained for last week after challenging a witness to defend his claim that "the left hates" Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas because he is not ideologically liberal.

What happened?

During a congressional hearing last Wednesday, Jeffries questioned attorney Mark Paoletta over his assertion that "many on the left hate Justice Thomas because he is a black conservative who has never bowed to those who demand that he must think a certain way because of his skin."

The hearing was focused on judicial ethics, a topic Democrats became hyper-concerned over after text messages showed that Thomas' wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, texted Mark Meadows after the 2020 election and urged then-President Donald Trump to challenge the results of the election. There is no evidence that Justice Thomas has committed any wrongdoing.

"What evidence do you have to support that incendiary charge?" Jeffries asked.

Paoletta then used the words of the subcommittee chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), to prove his claim.

"When chairman Bennie Thompson calls him an ‘Uncle Tom’ because of his views on voter ID and affirmative action, when, in fact, more black Americans support voter ID, and with respect to affirmative action and college education, 62% opposed to it. So that is the most vile, disgusting thing you can say. And so yes, that’s the evidence," Paoletta said.

Rep. Jeffries: "What evidence do you have to support" that Dems hate Clarence Thomas because he's a black conservative?\n\n\u201cThe Chairman of this committee called him an Uncle Tom.\u201d\n\nRep. Jeffries: \u201cHe has freedom of speech.\u201d\n\n"Can I give you another example."\n\nRep. Jeffries: "No."pic.twitter.com/HTaMxr8oGK
— Daily Caller (@Daily Caller) 1651159548

Jeffries then attempted to ignore the evidence that Paoletta provided.

"Reclaiming my time, there are a lot of vile and disgusting things —" Jeffries began to say.

"You just asked me for an example," shot back Paoletta, who served as general counsel to the Office of Management and Budget during the Trump administration.

But Jeffries still did not acknowledge what Paoletta said and instead claimed that Paoletta's response to his challenge indicated that he has "a particular bias."

"Can I give you another example?” Paoletta followed up.

"No," Jeffries said.

What did Thompson say?

Paoletta was referring to comments Thompson made in 2014 when he insulted Thomas as an "Uncle Tom" because of his Supreme Court decisions.

Thompson said Thomas is an "Uncle Tom" because "his decisions on the court ... have been adverse to the minority community, and the people I represent have a real issue with an African-American not being sensible to those issues."

When Thompson was challenged over the offensiveness of the insult, Thompson justified it by saying, "But I'm black."

The New Yorker Lies Again In Hit On Clarence Thomas And Wife That Falsely Claims He Attended A DC Event

Jane Mayer’s article is full of falsehoods, consistent with the malicious book she co-authored about Clarence Thomas in 1994.