Lindsey Graham Vows to Keep Supreme Court Corrupt
Senator Lindsey Graham appears to be all that stands in the way of placing some ethical parameters on Supreme Court gifts.The South Carolina Republican told NBC News Tuesday that he plans to object to a Judiciary Committee proposal to rein in the high court. That would effectively kill any chance of the measure passing in committee, thanks to a request earlier this week requiring unanimous consent.The court, which has long avoided the kinds of formal ethics regulations imposed on lower courts, due to its special constitutional status, implemented its first ethics code in November following a wave of high-profile scandals related to lavish gifts accepted by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. But the self-imposed behavioral code was roundly criticized as weak, employing loose language warning justices to “avoid impropriety” while failing to outline literally any type of consequence for violations.“Under what circumstances would a Supreme Court justice be accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions of dollars in foreign travel or paid tuition for family members or a recreational vehicle?” Representative Jamie Raskin asked, on MSNBC Tuesday. “It’s just outlandish for us to contemplate.”“That’s a jailable offense for people over here,” Raskin said, motioning inside the Capitol. “It’s just the normal business as usual at the Supreme Court, that they’re collecting millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of dollars from their so-called friends.”“We want a $50 gift ban for U.S. Supreme Court justices. They make $300,000 a year. Pay for your own lunch, and pay for your own vacation,” he added.But even Democrats were not optimistic that it would pass.“I think I know the outcome, but we’re going to go through the exercise to make sure that both parties are on the record,” Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin told reporters Tuesday.But imposing an ethical mandate on the nation’s highest judiciary will not be completely off the table should the proposal fail to pass committee. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said that he’s considering bringing it up for a vote under the normal process—though doing so would be tough. The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act needs 60 votes to break a filibuster on the Senate floor, but there are only 51 Democrats in the upper chamber, and no Republican has voiced their support for the bill.Ethically dubious expenses by two of the court’s conservative justices were first revealed last year in a series of investigations by ProPublica, which found that Thomas had been pocketing favors from GOP megadonor Harlan Crow in a number of ways, including private school tuition for his nephew, the renovation of the home where his mother still lives, and undisclosed trips on the billionaire’s yacht and private jet, and at his private resort. The outlet unveiled a similar scandal with Alito, who failed to report a luxury fishing vacation to Alaska with hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer in 2008.
Senator Lindsey Graham appears to be all that stands in the way of placing some ethical parameters on Supreme Court gifts.
The South Carolina Republican told NBC News Tuesday that he plans to object to a Judiciary Committee proposal to rein in the high court. That would effectively kill any chance of the measure passing in committee, thanks to a request earlier this week requiring unanimous consent.
The court, which has long avoided the kinds of formal ethics regulations imposed on lower courts, due to its special constitutional status, implemented its first ethics code in November following a wave of high-profile scandals related to lavish gifts accepted by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. But the self-imposed behavioral code was roundly criticized as weak, employing loose language warning justices to “avoid impropriety” while failing to outline literally any type of consequence for violations.
“Under what circumstances would a Supreme Court justice be accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions of dollars in foreign travel or paid tuition for family members or a recreational vehicle?” Representative Jamie Raskin asked, on MSNBC Tuesday. “It’s just outlandish for us to contemplate.”
“That’s a jailable offense for people over here,” Raskin said, motioning inside the Capitol. “It’s just the normal business as usual at the Supreme Court, that they’re collecting millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of dollars from their so-called friends.”
“We want a $50 gift ban for U.S. Supreme Court justices. They make $300,000 a year. Pay for your own lunch, and pay for your own vacation,” he added.
But even Democrats were not optimistic that it would pass.
“I think I know the outcome, but we’re going to go through the exercise to make sure that both parties are on the record,” Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin told reporters Tuesday.
But imposing an ethical mandate on the nation’s highest judiciary will not be completely off the table should the proposal fail to pass committee. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said that he’s considering bringing it up for a vote under the normal process—though doing so would be tough. The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act needs 60 votes to break a filibuster on the Senate floor, but there are only 51 Democrats in the upper chamber, and no Republican has voiced their support for the bill.
Ethically dubious expenses by two of the court’s conservative justices were first revealed last year in a series of investigations by ProPublica, which found that Thomas had been pocketing favors from GOP megadonor Harlan Crow in a number of ways, including private school tuition for his nephew, the renovation of the home where his mother still lives, and undisclosed trips on the billionaire’s yacht and private jet, and at his private resort. The outlet unveiled a similar scandal with Alito, who failed to report a luxury fishing vacation to Alaska with hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer in 2008.
