WASHINGTON — The Senate Judiciary hearing erupted on Tuesday with Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) proclaiming that the only reason Democrats are freaking out about the ethics of Supreme Court Justices is to specifically target conservatives.
"I learned that all of this is subterfuge, to try to put pressure on the court," Kennedy told Raw Story after the hearing. He went on to say that nothing would happen because of the "way the Democrats went about it." Kennedy said that regardless of whether or not the lawmakers agreed with Democrats about the necessity for ethics rules or enforcement mechanisms, he didn't like their attitude.
As it stands, there are some loose rules overseeing the conduct of the court and the justices, but effectively the justices police themselves.
According to Kennedy, the conservative justices are just doing what liberal justices have done – though recent questions involving financial disclosures, including the controversy over Justice Clarence Thomas' dealings with a billionaire, have not involved liberals.
IN OTHER NEWS: Top GOP figures charged in ballot fraud case out of New York
The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who was awarded the $1 million Berggruen Prize for Philosophy & Culture for her contributions to social justice and general equality, donated the money because rules for justices outlined that the only funds justices can accept are from teaching, book royalties or book advances, Fox Business reported.
And "in 1996, according to financial disclosures, she gave $100,000 from an award to more than a dozen schools and civil rights organizations," the Fox report recalled.
"They just overplayed their hand," Kennedy said of the Democrats. He went on to say he doesn't think Justice Clarence Thomas did anything wrong by accepting gifts and financial aid from Republican megadonor Harlan Crow. At issue for Democrats, however, is why Thomas hid the information if there was nothing untoward.
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) called Democrats outright "racists" for attacking Thomas. Since the report on Thomas has come out, however, there have been revelations about Justice Neil Gorsuch leaving details off about the sale of his timeshare in Colorado. While Gorsuch reported the sale, he wouldn't say who the buyer was. He swears he didn't know the law firm CEO with cases before the Court.
Others have questioned whether it's unethical for Chief Justice John Roberts' wife to have made over $10 million from law firms all over the country for talent recruitment. Reports said that Jane Roberts, a lawyer in her own right, intentionally chose that as a job after her husband was appointed because it allowed for the least amount of a conflict of interest.
But according to Cramer, since day one with Anita Hill, Democrats proved they were racist. Anita Hill is also Black. Moderate Democrats on the Judiciary at that time were criticized for not going hard enough against Thomas and being dismissive of Hill's accusations.
"It's a bunch of hooey," said Cramer when Raw Story asked him about the hearing. "Just a bunch of hot air from left-wing nutjobs in the media. First of all, it's all aimed at conservatives, and as anyone who pays attention knows, it's not universal. So, why all the focus on conservatives?"
Conservative justices are the ones that are breaking the reporting requirements.
"I just think most of it -- the little bit I've read, it just seems like if the rules need to be changed, then change the rules," Cramer continued. "But if people live within the rules and you don't like them ..."
He went on to say, "so what" when asked about the unreported cash and gifts given to Thomas from Crow. He said it wasn't shocking that conservatives know each other. "It's a silly thing that a guy can't have a relationship with or a friendship with someone because he's rich."
Under the federal judicial ethics rules, such relationships are perfectly acceptable, so long as gifts and funds are disclosed. That's where Thomas ran afoul of the rules and why Democrats are questioning it.
When Raw Story asked Cramer if he had ever flown on people's private jets or hung out on private yachts, he confessed that Congress has its own ethics rules. He then dodged repeating his comment that people should just change the rules if they need to be changed.
That's precisely what Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy (CT) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) have been working toward for over a decade.
"Yeah, I've got one of the bills," Murphy told Raw Story outside of the Capitol on Tuesday afternoon. "I've introduced the Supreme Court Ethics Act for 15 years, so, I've been worried about this issue far before we knew about the significant interest problems Justice Thomas has."
He went on to say he can't understand why Republicans are being so partisan about it.
Why does it have to Hatfields and McCoys? Can't we just agree this is really wrong and that there at least be a code of ethics?" Murphy asked. "I mean, if you're a conservative, you don't need to call for his resignation, but why not just say there should be some rules? I just think the party has lost its mooring. It's all about winning. It's all about power. And it's probably a reflection of what Donald Trump has done to the party."
He went on to reiterate that his law was first introduced 15 years ago, which was before Sen. Cramer's election to the House and the Senate. Sen. Kennedy similarly only joined the Senate six years ago, which might explain why he's also ill-informed about the bills proposed in the past.
Murphy said that he pitched his bill because at the time "there were both liberal and conservative justices were starting to show up at a lot of political events and political conferences. So, the genesis of my legislation was due to some disturbing reports from a variety of justices."
Sen. Merkley told Raw Story that he has been shocked seeing the Court "go so far off track."
"These positions are generously compensated," said Merkley. "They're allowed to get more generously compensated through their work as professors for law schools. I mean, they're in a whole different level at that level than members of Congress. And it's hard to represent the very pentacle of equal justice under the law, which includes the concept of ethics and fair judgment. And it's become very clear with instance after instance over the last decade that they have not taken that responsibility seriously."
He told the Court that they needed "to get their act together." Over the years, he explained, the Congress has been careful not to tell the Judiciary how to behave due to the separation of powers.
"But it's clear now that they have to be reigned in," he said. "The check and balance has to work both ways."
He acknowledged that it's a problem now over conservatives but that all rules would apply across the board. The fact that Republicans are talking about "the Republicans on the Supreme Court" just goes to show how divided the two parties are. Judicial appointees to the highest Court in the land was once thought to be independent.
Merkley has been the driving force behind the Congressional STOCK Act, which would hold lawmakers accountable for investments that they have in industries they regulate. It's a bipartisan problem as well.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) signed onto a bill requiring a code of ethics for the Court last week.
