[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 92 (Tuesday, May 30, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1779-S1780]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           U.S. Supreme Court

  Mr. President, when I went home to Illinois, I can't tell you how 
many people who know that I chair the Judiciary Committee asked me: 
What is going on with the U.S. Supreme Court?
  It is an obvious question because, in the last few weeks, there have 
been disclosures about at least one Justice on the Court that have 
raised some serious questions.
  Justices have an important job to fill as one of the major branches 
of our government. They will be issuing their remaining decisions for 
this term, and they will recess soon, until they reconvene in October.
  But the debate is still going to continue, even if they are not 
sitting in the Court across the street. How will the Justices spend 
their time during these several months when they are not in session? 
That is really the question.
  Rest up? Possibly. Or spend time with their family? Possibly. Or 
maybe take a trip or two. There, we have a question that is timely.
  We have learned through recent investigative reporting that some 
Supreme Court Justices on the highest Court in the land have enjoyed 
lavish travel during the summer months. That travel was often paid for 
by others, and the Justices, in some cases, did not disclose this free 
travel as is required by law.
  These are the Justices on the highest Court in the land, and the 
question is whether they are following the law. They impose legal 
obligations on citizens across the America. Are they living by the same 
legal obligations that affect them as Justices? It is a pretty obvious 
question.
  Most notably, ProPublica recently found that in June 2019, after the 
Court issued its final opinion that term, Justice Clarence Thomas 
boarded a private jet and flew to Indonesia. Then the Justice and his 
wife spent 9 days island hopping through the South Pacific on a yacht 
that was 162 feet long.
  ProPublica estimated the cost of chartering the plane and yacht at 
more than half a million dollars, but Justice Thomas didn't pay for 
that. The travel and trip were provided by billionaire real estate 
developer Harlan Crow and several corporate entities in Crow's business 
empire. This is just one example of the largess provided to Justice 
Thomas by Mr. Crow and his businesses.
  It has also been reported that the Justice has regularly spent time 
at a luxury retreat in the Adirondacks owned by one of Mr. Crow's 
companies--again, free of charge.
  Mr. Crow has also bought real estate owned by Justice Thomas, 
including the home in which his mother lives. And Mr. Crow even paid 
for private school tuition for one of the Justice's relatives.
  Justice Thomas did not disclose any of these gifts or travel or 
lodging or other benefits.
  Let me say at the outset that Justice Thomas is not the only Supreme 
Court Justice, past or present, who has accepted gifts of free travel 
and failed to disclose them in a timely manner. But the scope and scale 
of the undisclosed Justice Thomas gifts have gone far beyond anything 
we have ever seen, and this highlights the enormous gap in the ethical 
standards for the Supreme Court Justices.
  We have known this for years. In February of 2012, 11 years ago, I 
first wrote to Chief Justice Roberts and urged him to adopt a code of 
ethical conduct to bind the Justices, just like the code that binds 
every other Federal judge in America. Chief Justice Roberts failed to 
act when I wrote to him 11 years ago. Since then, the Court's ethics 
problems have just gotten worse.
  Last month, after ProPublica published its first report on Justice 
Thomas's undisclosed travel, I renewed my call for Chief Justice Thomas 
to clean up the ethical mess across the street, and I invited him--I 
personally invited him--to testify at a hearing before our Senate 
Judiciary Committee so he could speak directly to the American people.
  You say: Wait a minute. How many times does a Supreme Court Justice 
come across the street and formerly appear before Congress?
  Well, it turns out, 92 different times since the year 1960--92 
different times.
  So they come across the street when they have something to tell us. I 
think they should be coming across the street to discuss the ethics of 
the Court. This would have been an opportunity for the Chief Justice to 
reassure the American people and start to restore trust in the High 
Court.
  I watch some of those news programs on Sunday morning--I am a typical 
politician--and they have the polling data of what people think of the 
Supreme Court. The numbers are bad. They are almost as bad as Congress. 
The fact is, they can do something about it, and they should. Trust in 
this Court has fallen to the lowest level in 50 years, and, 
unfortunately, the Supreme Court's Chief Justice didn't accept my 
invitation to walk across the street.
  Time and again, I have made clear one point that I want to make clear 
today: The Chief Justice, John Roberts, has the ability right now, the 
authority right now to impose higher ethical standards on his fellow 
Justices--standards that would be transparent and enforceable. Wouldn't 
that be refreshing? He could take that action today, but, for some 
reason, so far, he has declined the opportunity.
  If he won't act, Congress must. We cannot tolerate a system in which 
the highest Court in America has the lowest ethical standards in the 
Federal Government. And we certainly should not begin another Supreme 
Court summer recess where Justices can take free

[[Page S1780]]

trips and travel under an inadequate set of ethics rules.
  Last week, Chief Justice Roberts gave a speech, and he said something 
encouraging. He said:

       I want to assure people that I'm committed to making 
     certain that we as a court adhere to the highest standards of 
     conduct.

  He said:

       We are continuing to look at things we can do to give 
     practical effect to that commitment.

  While I appreciate the Chief Justice's commitment, the fact is that 
we need action, and he doesn't need to look far away for solutions. We 
have known for years what the Court needs: binding rules and 
enforcement mechanisms, just like every other Federal judge has 
operated under for decades.
  If every other Federal judge has ethical standards and disclosures, 
why does the Chief Justice for the highest Court in the land not have 
at least those levels of ethical standards but even higher?
  The Senate Judiciary Committee has the responsibility to exercise 
oversight over the Federal judiciary. We take it seriously. We have 
held two ethics reform hearings so far this year, and soon we will 
consider legislation to restore trust in the High Court.
  When billionaires and other people with interests before the Court 
try to make friends with the Justices through gifts and luxury 
giveaways, and when they obtain special, private access to these 
Justices for themselves and others or their friends, it is a serious 
problem. At a minimum, it creates an appearance of undue influence that 
erodes the public's trust in the Court's impartiality.
  We don't yet know the full extent of the benefits that Harlan Crow 
and his company gave to Justice Thomas and his family, nor do we know 
yet how many other people and companies with interests before the Court 
may have gotten special, private access to Justice Thomas or some other 
Justice through trips and lodging that people like Harlan Crow have 
sponsored.
  My Democratic colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee and I sent 
a letter to Mr. Crow and the three companies that we think sponsored 
the trip for Justice Thomas. We asked him: Tell us about the gifts. 
Tell us about the access of people to Justice Thomas during this 
hospitality extravaganza. The information would be valuable for us in 
writing a law for the ethics standards of the Court.
  Mr. Crow responded through his attorney last week with a letter that 
took some astonishing legal positions. He basically claimed that 
Congress lacks the authority to either legislate or conduct oversight 
when it comes to the Supreme Court's ethics. He also tried to assert 
separation of powers as an excuse not to answer our questions.
  Of course, Congress has enacted many ethics laws that apply to the 
Justices, including a law we passed just last year--a bipartisan law, 
sponsored by a Democratic and a Republican Senator, on stock 
transaction reporting. The Justices have announced they are going to 
follow those laws.
  Mr. Crow is a private citizen, not a branch of government. He can't 
claim separation of powers as a reason not to provide information 
pursuant to a congressional oversight request. He is a businessman. He 
is not a branch of government. If Mr. Crow is convinced he has done 
nothing wrong, what does he have to hide?
  Senator Whitehouse, the chair of the Federal Courts Subcommittee, and 
I responded to Mr. Crow last week and informed him that he still has 
until next Monday, June 5, to provide the information we requested. As 
I mentioned, we will soon be considering legislation in the committee, 
and his information could be helpful in our legislative effort.
  Let me close by reiterating that Chief Justice Roberts does not have 
to wait on Harlan Crow or Congress. He can clean up this mess today by 
adopting a resolution binding the Justices to higher ethical standards.
  This is the Roberts Court. History is going to write the history of 
the Supreme Court in the name of this Chief Justice. It happens all the 
time. He is going to be known as the Chief Justice who ignored an 
ethical challenge that went to the heart of the integrity of the Court 
or as a Chief Justice who finally responded, in a historic manner, to 
do the right thing by disclosing to the American people exactly what 
the conduct is of his Justices.
  Chief Justice Roberts has known for more than 10 years that this is a 
problem, and the solution is within his authority. He should act before 
the end of this Supreme Court term.
  Don't leave this hanging. Don't leave town, leave Washington, with 
the issues of the Justices of the Court unresolved.
  I honestly believe, whether I voted for them or not, that there are 
Justices in that Court who are uneasy and uncomfortable with the 
current state of affairs. They are trying their level best to follow 
the law, and they can't explain why others are not. They want to have 
an opportunity to prove their own reputations and their own integrity, 
and they should. The Chief Justice should be listening to them, and I 
hope he is. It is the Chief Justice of the Court's time to act. If they 
don't, we will.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Texas.