SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
dick durbin
Amid GOP Outrage Over Witnesses, Omar Welcomes Hate Crimes Hearing
"This vital hearing is a crucial step in addressing the alarming rise of hate crimes across our nation, particularly those targeting Muslim, Jewish, and Palestinian Americans."
Sep 16, 2024
On the eve of a U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about "stemming the tide of hate crimes" nationwide, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Monday commended the panel's chair, Sen. Dick Durbin, for "hosting this groundbreaking yet overdue" event.
Discrimination against Jews and Muslims has significantly increased in the United States since the Hamas-led October 7 attack on Israel and the U.S.-backed Israeli retaliation on the Gaza Strip, which critics worldwide call genocide. In May, Durbin (D-Ill.) vowed to hold a hearing "in response to the ongoing and persistent rise in antisemitism and other forms of bigotry across the country."
The committee announced last week that it had scheduled a Capitol Hill hearing for 10:00 am Tuesday to "examine how we can better protect Jewish, Arab, and Muslim Americans, and other vulnerable communities from bigoted attacks."
Durbin—who has faced calls from Republican committee members to hold a hearing focused on "the civil rights violations of Jewish students" and "the proliferation of terrorist ideology"—said at the time that "hate crimes are a threat to justice everywhere. Sadly, no community is immune from violent acts of hate. Congress cannot turn a blind eye to it."
"We must stand united against hate in all its forms and reaffirm our commitment to justice, equality, and the protection of all Americans, regardless of their race, faith, or national origin."
Omar (D-Minn.) expressed gratitude for Durbin's broader event, saying Monday that "this vital hearing is a crucial step in addressing the alarming rise of hate crimes across our nation, particularly those targeting Muslim, Jewish, and Palestinian Americans."
"I'm glad this committee hearing will address the rise in hate felt by thousands across the country, I hope this hearing serves as a catalyst for meaningful action," she continued. "We must stand united against hate in all its forms and reaffirm our commitment to justice, equality, and the protection of all Americans, regardless of their race, faith, or national origin."
Omar is an outspoken opponent of Israel's assault on Gaza and U.S. support for it. She fled war in Somalia as a child and is one of only a few Muslim members of Congress—and while in office, she has endured intense racism, sexism, Islamophobia, and death threats. Some of the hate has come from fellow federal lawmakers.
Her praise for the hearing came amid reports that some Republicans and Jewish groups are unhappy with Democrats' witnesses: Arab American Institute executive director Maya Berry and Kenneth Stern, director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate.
Notably, when Stern was with the American Jewish Committee, he helped craft the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism. He has since accused right-wing groups of "weaponizing" it in their efforts to conflate criticism of Israeli government policies and practices with anti-Jewish bigotry.
Describing both Berry and Stern as "at odds with Jewish communal leaders," Jewish Insiderreported:
In his opening statement to the committee, obtained by Jewish Insider ahead of Tuesday's hearing, Stern will testify that "advocating for genocide against anyone of course should be robustly condemned; but the mere expression of such ideas (whether intended as such or heard as such) should be countered, not as a matter for discipline."
Stern will also say that it is a good thing that David Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, did not face any disciplinary action when he spread Nazi propaganda on Louisiana State University's campus as a student in 1968. "This would have allowed him to claim the status of martyr, and changed the subject to his right to speech as opposed to the content of his hate," Stern will say.
"Berry's written testimony focuses primarily on hate crimes data and reporting, and federal enforcement of hate crimes laws," according to Jewish Insider. The outlet added that the Republican witness Rabbi Mark Goldfeder, director of the National Jewish Advocacy Center, "is set to express support for the IHRA definition."
In response to Jewish Insider editor in chief Josh Kraushaar's social media post sharing the report, Center for International Policy executive vice president Matt Duss said, "Translation: testimony from Ken Stern and Maya Berry, who are both widely respected authorities on these issues, makes it harder to use this hearing as part of the campaign to suppress pro-Palestinian activism."
While this will be the first Senate hearing on hate crimes since last October, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has held multiple, mostly focusing on campus anti-genocide protests. Critics have argued that the lower chamber's events have pushed university administrators to enable violent law enforcement crackdowns on students demonstrating against Israel's assault on Gaza.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lindsey Graham Blocks Democrats' Attempt to Pass Supreme Court Ethics Bill
"Senate Republicans just showed how out of touch they are with what most Americans want—a Supreme Court free of corruption."
Jun 13, 2024
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham on Wednesday blocked an attempt by Senate Democrats to pass Supreme Court reform legislation by unanimous consent, thwarting efforts to establish a binding ethics code for the nation's top court as two of its right-wing justices come under fire for taking billionaire-funded luxury vacations and flying flags associated with the January 6 insurrection.
The Democratic legislation—titled the the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency (SCERT) Act—advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee nearly a year ago without any GOP support. The bill would give the high court 180 days to adopt a binding code of ethics and establish new recusal requirements surrounding justices' acceptance of gifts.
Supreme Court justices are currently the only federal judges in the U.S. not bound by an ethics code. Last year, under massive pressure following revelations of Justice Clarence Thomas' undisclosed luxury trips, the Supreme Court announced an ethics code with no enforcement mechanism, effectively rendering it toothless.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), the lead sponsor of the SCERT Act, said Wednesday that he was "not surprised" Republicans blocked the attempt to pass his bill.
"The highest court shouldn't have the lowest ethics standards," Whitehouse wrote on social media. "What's controversial about that?"
"Both Justice Thomas and Justice Alito have failed to disclose gifts they have accepted—in clear violation of financial disclosure requirements under federal law."
The chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), spearheaded Democrats' attempt Wednesday to pass the SCERT Act by unanimous consent, process under which just one objection is enough to block legislation. Given Democrats' narrow control of the Senate and the continued existence of the legislative filibuster, the bill almost certainly would have failed had it gone to a full vote.
"For more than a year, the Supreme Court has been embroiled in an ethical crisis of its own design," Durbin said in a floor speech Wednesday. "Story after story about ethical misconduct by sitting Supreme Court justices has led the news for months. For decades, however, Justice Clarence Thomas has accepted lavish gifts and luxury trips from a gaggle of fawning billionaires. The total dollar value of these gifts is in the millions. One Supreme Court justice—millions of dollars worth of gifts."
"Justice [Samuel] Alito, as well, went on a luxury fishing trip that should have cost him over $100,000—but it didn't cost him a dime, because the trip was funded by a billionaire and organized by rightwing kingpin Leonard Leo. Both Justice Thomas and Justice Alito have failed to disclose gifts they have accepted—in clear violation of financial disclosure requirements under federal law. But it isn't only this shameless conduct that has cast a dark shadow over the court. Time and again, these justices' actions have cast doubt on their impartiality in cases before the court."
Graham's obstruction of the ethics bill came as the Supreme Court is weighing a slew of high-stakes cases, including one on whether former President Donald Trump is immune from criminal prosecution.
Thomas, whose wife supported efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, and Alito, who blamed his wife for flying pro-insurrection flags at two of their homes, have both rejected calls to recuse themselves from the case.
"The Supreme Court clearly can't and won't police itself," Christina Harvey, executive director of Stand Up America, said in a statement Wednesday. "Time and again, the right-wing majority on the court has shown that it is unwilling to abide by basic rules of ethics. Passing the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Actwas an opportunity to guarantee basic ethics standards and restore some trust in the highest court in our country."
"Eighty percent of voters want Congress to pass a binding code of ethics for the Supreme Court," Harvey added. "Senate Republicans just showed how out of touch they are with what most Americans want—a Supreme Court free of corruption—when they refused to hold our Supreme Court justices accountable to the same ethical standards that apply to members of Congress and public servants across the country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Blaming Wife for Insurrection Flags, Alito Refuses to Recuse From Trump Cases
"It's hard to read this comically bad letter as anything other than a challenge to Congress to either assert its constitutional authority or admit fecklessness," said one group.
May 29, 2024
Despite his family's display of two flags associated with the "Stop the Steal" movement that baselessly claims the 2020 election was stolen from former President Donald Trump, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said Wednesday that he will not recuse himself from two cases that pertain to the election and Trump supporters' effort to stop the results from being certified.
The justice wrote to the House of Representatives and the Senate to tell lawmakers that his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, was solely responsible for flying the two flags on the family's properties in Virginia in 2021 and New Jersey last year.
Justice advocates and Democrats in Congress have called on Alito to recuse from a case regarding Trump's claim that he has immunity from federal election interference charges and one in which the court is deliberating whether defendants who participated in the January 6, 2021 attempted insurrection should be charged with obstructing an official proceeding.
The demands for recusal—not the first to target Alito—came in recent weeks after The New York Times reported that an upside down flag had flown at his family home in Virginia just after January 6, and that a flag reading, "Appeal to Heaven" had been displayed last year at his New Jersey beach house, right around the time that one of the cases arrived at the Supreme Court.
Both flags were carried by some rioters on January 6 and have been embraced by the Stop the Steal movement.
The display of the flags, said Alito, "do not meet the conditions for recusal set out" by the court's ethics code, which was introduced last year and does not include an enforcement mechanism.
In his letters, Alito suggested that the push for accountability for the flag displays represents a violation of his wife's rights, noting that "she has the legal right to use the property as she sees fit."
"She makes her own decisions, and I have always respected her right to do so," wrote Alito, leading one progressive strategist to point out that the justice wrote the majority opinion in the Supreme Court ruling that revoked the constitutional right to obtain abortion care.
Brett Edkins, managing director of policy and political affairs for Stand Up America, called on the Senate to take "immediate action" to stop Alito's "bald-faced display of judicial misconduct."
"Justice Alito's refusal to recuse himself from cases related to January 6th is unacceptable," said Edkins. "By dismissing concerns about potential bias and conflicts of interest and placing the blame on his wife, he is making a mockery of the fundamental principles of impartiality and fairness upon which the Supreme Court was founded."
Edkins called on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to "schedule a floor vote on a binding code of conduct for justices" and urged Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) to "fulfill his duty as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee by launching a thorough investigation into Justice Alito's actions and corruption on the court."
Durbin sent a letter last week to Chief Justice John Roberts asking him to support the call for Alito's recusal and requesting a meeting with him, but progressives have said the senator should go further to ensure accountability for Alito's actions.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said last week that the Senate Judiciary Committee should subpoena Alito and open a formal investigation into his family's display of the flags.
Sarah Lipton-Lubet, president of Take Back the Court Action Fund, said Wednesday that it was tempting to "make fun of Alito for scribbling off the judicial equivalent of a 'my wife ate my homework' note."
"But the joke will be on all of us if Congress lets this be the last word on his recusal from election-related cases," said Lipton-Lubet. "It's hard to read this comically bad letter as anything other than a challenge to Congress to either assert its constitutional authority or admit fecklessness."
The court is expected to rule on the two Trump-related cases in late June.
Advocates have previously called on Alito to recuse from certain cases after it was revealed that he benefited from luxury travel paid for by a billionaire who had had business before the court.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular