Senate Judiciary Democrats Reject Unfounded Refusals To Comply With Information Requests By Those Seeking To Influence Supreme Court Justices

Letter

"Your position is at odds with basic separation-of-powers principles favoring checks and balances and rejecting the "archaic view of the separation of powers as requiring three air-tight departments of government.' Your argument is especially unreasonable in the government ethics context, given that the Judicial Conference is a creation of Congress, a number of longstanding judicial ethics-related laws have been passed by Congress, and the Supreme Court has adhered to those laws without complaint in multiple instances.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

[Y]ou cite a list of conduct by other justices you claim has "been ignored.' But all the conduct you cite was properly disclosed, whereas the Committee's investigation focuses on the problem of undisclosed conduct. Specifically, the Committee has been examining how the current ethical framework governing federal judges fails to capture the full scope of previously undisclosed gifts, transportation, and lodging made available to Supreme Court justices by parties with business before the Court. As undisclosed gifts by wealthy benefactors continue to be revealed, one commonality in these reports is your connection to the undisclosed gifts from these benefactors.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Additionally, the ethical lapses of Supreme Court justices, including the well-documented undisclosed gifts that Justice Thomas has accepted from you over two decades, go well beyond five years … Receiving only partial responses during this arbitrary time period is insufficient to inform the Committee's ongoing legislative efforts. Parties with matters before the Court continue to take advantage of access to justices made possible by both disclosed and undisclosed transportation, lodging, and other gifts."

Source