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
senate judiciary committee
Pro-Democracy Alliance Says Supreme Court's Trump Immunity Ruling Must Not Stand
"The ramifications of this ruling are not abstract, especially following the January 6 attack on the Capitol," said one coalition member. "This decision impacts everyone, because the actions of the president of the United States affect all of us."
Sep 23, 2024
Dozens of civil society groups on Monday told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee that congressional action is "imperative" to ensure the Supreme Court decision in Trump v. United States does not stand, warning that the court's ruling on presidential immunity in July "poses a significant threat to our democracy."
In deciding that a U.S. president has "absolute immunity" for "official acts" taken while in office, said the groups, the court "effectively [provided] the president with sweeping legal immunity for criminal acts" two-and-a-half years after former President Donald Trump urged his supporters to block the 2020 election results from being certified with a violent riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
"The idea that a president should be granted constitutional protection from prosecution for otherwise criminal 'official acts' is an affront to the fundamental principle of American democracy that no one is above the law," reads the letter sent to the committee by groups including Public Citizen, Accountable.US, and Free Speech for People.
The organizations asked the committee to enter the letter into the official record ahead of a hearing on the Trump v. United States ruling, which is set for Tuesday.
The signatories quoted Justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissent to the ruling, in which she listed scenarios in which a president could now be immune from prosecution following the 6-3 decision.
"The idea that a president should be granted constitutional protection from prosecution for otherwise criminal 'official acts' is an affront to the fundamental principle of American democracy that no one is above the law."
"Under the ruling, if the president '[o]rders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune,'" wrote the groups.
Jonah Minkoff-Zern, co-director of Public Citizen's Democracy Campaign, emphasized that even without hypotheticals, the harm done by Trump v. United States is clear.
"The language in Trump v. United States suggests the president, in theory, could do whatever they want, whenever they want, without facing accountability under criminal law, so long as they could claim to be carrying out 'official acts,'" said Minkoff-Zern. "The ramifications of this ruling are not abstract, especially following the January 6 attack on the Capitol. This decision impacts everyone, because the actions of the president of the United States affect all of us. It's telling that so many different organizations have signed onto this letter."
The ruling sent a case regarding Trump's alleged attempts to conspire to obstruct an official proceeding on January 6 back to a lower court, ensuring that he won't face trial for charges against him before the November election, in which the Republican is running against Vice President Kamala Harris.
The groups pointed to a number of congressional actions that could be taken to "address the harms" of the ruling, including the passage of:
- Rep. Joe Morelle's (D-N.Y.) "Not Above the Law" constitutional amendment, which would reverse the decision;
- Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's (D-N.Y.) No Kings Act, which would establish that president and vice presidents don't have immunity from prosecution for criminal acts, and
- Sen. Mazie Hirono's (D-Hawaii) amendment to "clarify that Presidents and other federal officeholders are, in fact, accountable to the law for their actions."
"Our country elects our leaders through a democratic process," said Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert, "and those duly elected leaders, including the president of the United States, must follow the law, not stand above it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate Dems Seek Special Counsel to Investigate Clarence Thomas and Billionaire Benefactors
"The evidence assembled thus far plainly suggests that Justice Thomas has committed numerous willful violations of federal ethics."
Jul 09, 2024
Stepping up efforts to hold U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas accountable for alleged ethics violations, two Democratic senators on Tuesday announced they'd requested that the Biden administration appoint a special counsel to investigate the right-wing judge.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who chairs a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on the federal courts and oversight, was joined by and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) in writing to Attorney General Merrick Garland, warning that extensive reporting has pointed to possible violations of the Ethics in Government Act by Thomas.
While the senators' committees have presented Thomas with opportunities to explain his failure to disclose a significant forgiven debt and several financial gifts he received from wealthy benefactors, the justice "has maintained a suspicious silence," said Whitehouse and Wyden.
"The evidence assembled thus far plainly suggests that Justice Thomas has committed numerous willful violations of federal ethics and false-statement laws and raises significant questions about whether he and his wealthy benefactors have complied with their federal tax obligations," wrote the senators. "No government official should be above the law. Supreme Court justices are properly expected to obey laws designed to prevent conflicts of interest and the appearance of impropriety and to comply with the federal tax code."
"We therefore request that you appoint a special counsel authorized to investigate potential criminal violations by Justice Thomas," they added.
The senators cited a loan of more than $267,000 to Thomas, in connection with his purchase of a luxury motor coach. The Senate Finance Committee found that the provider of the loan, Anthony Welters, a wealthy businessman in the healthcare sector, stopped collecting principal and interest on the loan in 2008—suggesting the debt was forgiven and therefore taxable.
"The Ethics in Government Act requires justices to disclose any 'income from discharge of indebtedness,'" wrote the senators. "Justice Thomas did not report any such forgiveness as income on his financial disclosure report covering the year 2008, or for any other year."
The letter also points to numerous financial gifts Thomas received from benefactors including billionaire Harlan Crow, businessman Wayne Huizenga, and former Berkshire Hathaway executive David Sokol. The justice has reportedly received free private jet travel, lodging, tuition for his grandnephew, a country club membership, and free rent for his mother, among other gifts, "all of which Justice Thomas failed to disclose" in violation of the Ethics in Government Act.
"Justice Thomas has claimed that some omissions were 'inadvertent,' and he has amended some past reports accordingly," wrote Whitehouse and Wyden. "However, Justice Thomas has not disclosed all of the gifts that have been uncovered, and there may well be more. His long history of omissions indicates a pattern of willfulness meriting investigation under the Ethics in Government Act."
On social media, Whitehouse added that "the American people deserve a comprehensive investigation into the potential violations of ethics and tax laws by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas."
Court reform groups and other progressives have long called for Thomas to be held accountable for multiple alleged conflicts of interest and other possible ethics violations—demanding that he recuse from cases involving former President Donald Trump due to his wife's involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and calling for a federal investigation into gifts he's received from people and groups who had business before the Supreme Court.
"It's beyond time we hold Clarence Thomas accountable for his actions," said the advocacy group End Citizens United.
The senators noted that an ethics investigation by a special counsel appointed by Garland could shed light on payments reportedly facilitated by Leonard Leo, board chair of the right-wing Federalist Society, which has pushed for the appointment of right-wing judges to the Supreme Court and other federal courts.
"Last year, The Washington Postreported that Leo directed payments of at least $25,000 to a consulting firm run by Justice Thomas's spouse, with Leo specifying that the documents related to the payments should make '[n]o mention' of Mrs. Thomas," wrote Whitehouse and Wyden. "The furtive nature of the payments raises further questions about how many such payments were orchestrated, whether legitimate services were actually rendered, and whether such payments required additional reporting by Justice Thomas."
An investigation is needed, said the senators, to uncover "the full scope of potential unlawful conduct related to any coordinated gifts program for certain justices."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Resign Immediately': Clarence Thomas Took Even More Secret Trips on Billionaire's Jet
"The next trip Justice Thomas takes should be into retirement. Resign," wrote one Democratic lawmaker.
Jun 14, 2024
The Senate Judiciary Committee revealed Thursday that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas took at least three additional undisclosed trips on a private jet owned by Texas billionaire Harlan Crow, a finding that prompted yet another round of calls for the right-wing judge to step down.
New details of Thomas' luxury travel emerged from negotiations between the Senate committee—which authorized a subpoena for Crow last year—and the billionaire's attorneys.
Documents the committee obtained from Crow "revealed travel and gifts that Justice Thomas has failed to disclose to date," including a May 2017 private jet trip from St. Louis to Kalispell, Montana and a return flight to Dallas; a March 2019 private jet trip from Washington, D.C. to Savannah, Georgia and back; and a June 2021 private jet trip from Washington, D.C. to San Jose, California and back.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement that "nearly $4.2 million in gifts and even that wasn't enough for Justice Thomas, with at least three additional trips the committee found that he has failed to disclose to date."
"The Senate Judiciary Committee's ongoing investigation into the Supreme Court's ethical crisis is producing new information—like what we've revealed today—and makes it crystal clear that the highest court needs an enforceable code of conduct, because its members continue to choose not to meet the moment," said Durbin. "As a result of our investigation and subpoena authorization, we are providing the American public greater clarity on the extent of ethical lapses by Supreme Court justices and the need for ethics reform."
"Thomas should resign immediately and I urge all my colleagues to demand the same."
The Senate panel's revelations came days after Thomas belatedly disclosed two luxury trips funded by Crow, a megadonor to the Republican Party. Thomas claims he "inadvertently omitted" the trips when he filed an earlier disclosure form.
The judiciary committee's Supreme Court investigation was spurred by a series of reports by the investigative outlet ProPublica, which uncovered dozens of billionaire-financed vacations Thomas has taken during his three decades on the bench. Ethics experts say Thomas likely violated the law by failing to disclose private jet flights and other gifts.
"A cadre of industry titans and ultrawealthy executives have treated him to far-flung vacations aboard their yachts, ushered him into the premium suites at sporting events, and sent their private jets to fetch him—including, on more than one occasion, an entire 737," the outlet reported last August. "It's a stream of luxury that is both more extensive and from a wider circle than has been previously understood."
ProPublica also uncovered a luxury fishing vacation that Justice Samuel Alito took with hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, who later had business before the Supreme Court.
Earlier this week, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) blocked Senate Democrats' attempt to pass legislation that would require the Supreme Court to adopt a binding code of ethics and create new recusal requirements surrounding justices' acceptance of gifts.
Following the judiciary panel's new disclosures, Democratic lawmakers reiterated their calls for Thomas to resign.
"Clarence Thomas is corrupt as hell and the corruption at the Republican Supreme Court stinks to high heaven," Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-N.J.) wrote on social media. "Thomas should resign immediately and I urge all my colleagues to demand the same."
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) echoed Pascrell, writing: "The next trip Justice Thomas takes should be into retirement. Resign."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular