geoff: A series of reports this
year about several conservative
supreme court justices accepting
free trips and failing to
disclose them has prompted
renewed efforts by senate
Democrats to implement a code of
ethics for the high court.
Democrats on the judiciary
committee intend to subpoena
Republican megadonor Harlan crow
and conservative legal activist
Leonard Leo as part of their
investigation.
A planned vote on those
subpoenas was postponed today.
Democratic senator Sheldon
Whitehouse of Rhode Island
chairs the subcommittee on
federal courts.
He joins us now.
Welcome to the newshour.
Sen. Whitehouse: Thanks for
having me on.
Geoff: The committee was
expected to vote on those
subpoenas today but hit a
roadblock.
What happened?
Sen. Whitehouse: The Republicans
are desperate not to have to
vote on this, and so last night
they filed nearly 90 amendments.
That meant that all of our
members had to review overnight
90 separate amendments, all of
them intended to be poisonous,
and try to figure out what our
joint response was going to be.
In effect, they jammed the gears
of the committee with an
avalanche of bad faith
amendments.
That stopped things today.
But the resolve of the committee
to vote out those subpoenas is
fixed and firm.
It is just a matter of
rescheduling.
Now that we know that is the
strategy, we can prepare for it.
Geoff: What information are you
seeking with these subpoenas to
Mr. Crowe and Mr. Leo?
Does the investigation extend
beyond what you see as I need to
implement a code of ethics?
The reason I ask the question is
I have washed your senate floor
speeches, and you seem to allude
to underlying tax crimes.
What is your theory of the case?
Geoff: -- Sen. Whitehouse:
First of all, we need to know
with these conservative justices
have been receiving.
Pro publ -- propublica has
brought out some things.
It is not clear that we know all
of it.
We also have to develop
information about how systemic
this is.
This is not just a random gift
here or there.
It is always the same
individuals, the same front
groups.
There is a network effect here
that we need to understand.
Then the finance committee
separately is looking at the tax
side for several reasons.
First of all, where these gifts
declared as income if they
should have been?
If the donor declared them as a
business expense, how do you get
away claiming that is
personal hospitality?
There are also gift tasks
considerations once you get over
$17,000.
It looks like the reporting
failures are not just failures
of the disclosure laws, they may
be violations of the tax laws.
Geoff:geoff: On this matter of
justice Thomas accepting gifts
and luxury trips, what do you
say to those who might make the
argument that Harlan crow can
spend his money how he sees fit,
and if justice Thomas is eating
canapes off the back of his mega
got, that will not change the
fact that he is a conservative
vote and voice on the supreme
court.
Sen. Whitehouse: The issue is
probably not Harlan crow.
I don't see that Harlan crow is
in trouble for any of this,
unless false statements were
filed of some kind, but we have
no indication of that.
The problem is on the court
side.
Supreme court justices, like
other judges, have an obligation
to file disclosures that show
what gifts and emoluments they
have received.
And that legal obligation, a law
passed by congress, is implement
it by the judicial conference, a
body created by
congress for that purpose.
We need to look into whether
those laws are being properly
implemented by the judicial
conference, should these big
gifts have been disclosed, and
how do the arguments that they
didn't need to be disclosed fare
when shown to the light of day?
My contention is the arguments
there are terrible in the light
of day.
The gifts should have been
disclosed, and potentially
because of the systematic nation
-- nature of these gifts,
there may be a good deal more to
this than just come on my yacht
and have a nice afternoon.
Geoff: So you said congress does
have a role here because
justice Alito says congress does
not have the authority to
implement a code of ethics on
the supreme court.
Sen. Whitehouse: That was weird
in several ways.
First, it was weird in that he
is wrong.
Second, it is weird in that he
offered it as an opinion in the
Wall Street journal editorial
page as opposed to a supreme
court opinion.
We are told every time they come
before us, we could not possibly
comment on that because we are
not allowed to offer opinions on
matters that might come before
the court.
There is a matter headed for the
court and he offered an opinion
on it.
The final salvo is when there
have been previous episodes of
potentially improper gifts,
those issues have been referred
to the judicial conference under
the disclosure laws, and of the
supreme court has never objected
to it.
When Harlan crow gave his first
round of yacht and jet travel
gifts to justice Thomas, that
question was referred to the
judicial conference and
addressed under these disclosure
laws.
To say we have no role here is
in flat conflict with the facts
and the history of what has
already taken place in similar
matters with the supreme court's
full consent.
Geoff: You and senator Durbin,
who now chairs the judiciary
committee, have been calling for
an enforceable code of
conduct for more than 10 years.
We know based on public
reporting and public comments
that justices Kagan, Cavanagh,
and coney Barrett --
sen. Whitehouse: And Roberts
himself.
Geoff: What is the hold up?
Sen. Whitehouse: The hold up is
Thomas and Alito, who have their
hands furthest in the cookie
jar, who probably do not want
further inquiry into that and
seem to be liking billionaire
funded lifestyles of the rich
and famous.
Geoff: There are Republicans who
say this entire effort, this
entire enterprise is aimed at
defanging the supreme court's
super majority as it moves
jurisprudence to the right.
What do you say to that?
Sen. Whitehouse: I think they
are wrong.
First of all, you mentioned that
the letter that began 11 years
ago before this had taken place,
so the timing doesn't work.
Second, set all the drama aside
and all the noise.
What you have is billionaires
with a demonstrated pattern of
trying to influence the supreme
court through a whole variety of
groups by giving donations and
participating, who are at the
same time giving enormous
massive secret gifts to
justices.
Just on the face, that merits
investigation.
And if it happened in any other
court in the United States, it
would have been investigated.
There would have been
fact-finding and a result and
consequences.
It is only the supreme court
that is living outside the
bounds on the rules.
If they were not living outside
the bounds of the rules, they
probably have a separate fight
over the merits of the decisions
they are making.
But that does not change the
fact that they are operating
right now outside of the rules.
Geoff: I want to get your
reaction to West Virginia
senator Joe Manchin announcing
he is not running for reelection
in 2024.
At a minimum, it will be
difficult if not impossible for
Democrats to hold onto that seat
in deep red West Virginia.
Sen. Whitehouse: I think that
probably puts an extra seat on
the table for Mitch Mcconnell,
and that means we have to fight
particularly hard to
fight in Texas and defeat Ted
Cruz.
Geoff: Is that possible?
Sen. Whitehouse: It seems.
We were very close last time and
I think we have a very good
candidate in collinalrea
da.
A local hero, very talented
member of congress.
I think that is good.
We also put potential pressure
on us to hold the other
democratic seats.
Geoff: Senator Sheldon
Whitehouse of Rhode Island,
thanks for coming in.
♪♪