[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 184 (Tuesday, November 7, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5386-S5387]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           U.S. Supreme Court

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, as a member of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, you are aware of the fact that I announced last week in the 
committee that we would vote to authorize subpoenas to Harlan Crow, 
Robin Arkley, and Leonard Leo as part of the Judiciary Committee's 
continuing investigation into the ethical situation at the U.S. Supreme 
Court.
  I do not make this decision lightly. Seeking authorization to issue 
subpoenas is a relatively rare occurrence in the committee. So today I 
come to the floor for a few minutes to explain why we have taken this 
significant step.
  Over the last several months, it has become clear that the Supreme 
Court is in desperate need of a binding code of ethics as we learned of 
lavish gifts and luxury travel that certain Supreme Court Justices have 
accepted from a gaggle of fawning billionaires.
  Let's start with Justice Clarence Thomas. The sheer number and value 
of gifts accepted by Justice Thomas is staggering, and the 
shamelessness with which he accepted them is stunning. For decades, 
Justice Thomas has accepted lavish gifts from Harlan Crow, a 
conservative billionaire with business before the Supreme Court. These 
gifts have ranged from a $19,000 Bible once owned by Frederick Douglass 
to a $15,000 bust of Abraham Lincoln. Justice Thomas also accepted 
private jet trips and free lodging at Bohemian Grove, an exclusive all-
male, invitation-only retreat in the redwoods of California. And these 
are only examples of what Justice Thomas disclosed.
  After the Los Angeles Times reported on these disclosures, Justice 
Thomas, in 2004, 19 years ago, promptly stopped disclosing gifts as 
required by law.
  We learned this year that he continued to accept expensive gifts for 
the past 19 years and that these billionaire benefactors have been part 
of a growing list.
  There isn't time to detail all of the undisclosed gifts, which the 
press has discovered, and luxury travel that Justice Thomas has 
accepted, but for the sake of a record, I am going to give a few 
examples.
  In 2019, Justice Thomas and his wife flew to Indonesia on Harlan 
Crow's private jet and boarded Crow's 162-foot superyacht, the Michaela 
Rose, to island hop with Harlan Crow and his wife.
  The total cost of that trip alone could have exceeded half a million 
dollars if Justice Thomas had chartered the jet and yacht. Lucky for 
him, Harlan Crow was happy to cover the costs.
  Justice Thomas also continued to join Crow on trips to Bohemian Grove 
in California. He visited Crow's ranch in East Texas, spent summers at 
Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks.
  But there is more. Crow paid thousands of dollars to cover tuition 
for Justice Thomas's grandnephew. He purchased real estate owned by 
Thomas and his relatives, including Thomas's mother's home, where she 
continues to live rent-free. And Crow donated half a million dollars to 
a conservative advocacy group founded by Justice Thomas's wife.
  I could go on and on and on because the list of gifts Justice Thomas 
has chosen to accept and failed to disclose goes on and on and on.
  Justice Thomas is not the only Supreme Court Justice who has accepted 
lavish gifts from billionaires and refused to disclose them. In 2008, 
Justice Samuel Alito boarded a private jet bound for Alaska to enjoy a 
luxury fishing trip, a trip that should have cost him over $100,000, 
but it didn't cost him one penny because of the man who organized the 
flight and joined Alito on the luxury fishing trip, Leonard Leo.
  Mr. Leo arranged Justice Alito's free flight to Alaska and his free 
lodging once he arrived. Their host at the luxury fishing lodge was a 
gentleman named Robin Arkley. Over the next few days, Justice Alito and 
his travel companions enjoyed guided fishing trips, flights on bush 
planes, meals of Alaskan king crab and Kobe beef, and wines costing 
upward of $1,000 a bottle.
  Justice Alito did not disclose any of this, and when challenged, for 
example, on the jet ride--why that should be disclosed--he said he 
didn't view it as a gift because if he didn't go, the seat on the plane 
would have gone empty.
  That is an interesting analysis of a gift from a strict 
constructionist.
  This kind of scandalous behavior cannot continue. One former Federal 
judge who served for years on the judicial committee that reviews the 
Justices' financial disclosures had this to say about the gifts to 
Justice Thomas:

       In my career, I don't remember ever seeing this degree of 
     largesse given to anybody.

  When referring to the cascade of gifts from Harlan Crow to Justice 
Thomas, the former chief White House ethics lawyer for Republican 
President George W. Bush said:

       This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of 
     anything I've seen.

  And renowned conservative jurist, Judge J. Michael Luttig, stated in 
testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee:

       The Supreme Court should want to lead by the example that 
     only it can set. It should want to conduct itself in its non-
     judicial activities in all ways such that it is beyond 
     reproach.

  Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has not lived up to this 
expectation. That is why our Senate Judiciary Committee is exercising 
its constitutional authority to investigate. Months ago, I, along with 
my Democratic colleagues on the committee, sent letters to Crow, 
Arkley, and Leo, among others, seeking details about what exactly

[[Page S5387]]

has been provided to Supreme Court Justices. Our goal has been to 
understand how specific individuals and groups with business before the 
Court have used undisclosed gifts to gain private access to Justices--
access not afforded to others.
  For months, Crow has refused to fully comply with the committee's 
requests, and Leo has completely stonewalled the committee. Only now, 
under threat of subpoena, Mr. Arkley has stepped forward, and we are 
looking forward to continuing our conversation with him this week.
  The fact that we have to go to this length is unacceptable but 
necessary. The Senate and the American people deserve to know the full 
extent of how billionaires with interests before the Court use their 
immense wealth to buy private access to our Supreme Court.
  That is why, on Thursday, the Judiciary Committee will vote to 
authorize subpoenas for these individuals. The vote is a critical step 
in the committee's exercise of its constitutional right and duty to 
conduct oversight of the Federal judiciary. It is critical to the 
committee's effort to restore the Court's reputation. The highest Court 
in the land should not have the lowest standard of ethics.
  This is not a fight I wanted, but now that it has come to this, the 
Judiciary Committee will not back down.
  Most Americans are shocked to know or to learn that the nine Justices 
on the Supreme Court are the only high-ranking Federal officials in the 
United States of America who are beyond the reach of a code of ethics. 
How do you explain that?
  How can you explain that every Federal judge in America is bound by a 
code of ethics except for the nine Supreme Court Justices?
  What is so special about them? The Constitution makes it clear that 
we don't have royalty in this country. They are acting like they belong 
to some legal fraternity or sorority. That has got to come to an end.
  When you look at the situation, Members of Congress are held to 
standards--and I am not complaining. I knew what I was getting into 
when I signed up for this job--held to standards of disclosure and 
limitation on gifts.
  I cannot tell you how many times I have said to a person: Is this 
worth more than 50 bucks? If they answer: Well, maybe, it might be, I 
say: Well, keep it and thanks for thinking of me.
  That is the kind of thing that just becomes a routine part of public 
service. These lavish gifts, particularly from individuals who have 
business before the Court, are just unacceptable and inexplicable.
  It is important for us to have a response when people ask: What are 
you doing to clean up things at the Supreme Court?
  The first thing we did, I think, was the responsible and respectable 
thing to do. We invited the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to 
appear before our committee and tell us his thoughts on the subject and 
what he believes should be done to deal with this bad publicity and 
these disclosures. He declined the invitation. I don't hold it against 
him. He explained, in my presence, a few weeks ago why he did. I 
understand it. I disagree with it, but I understand it.
  But 11 years ago, was the first time I contacted the Chief Justice 
and said: This has got to come to an end. Tell us what you are going to 
do about establishing a code of ethics on the Supreme Court. Eleven 
years ago and nothing--nothing--has happened since.
  I want to salute and commend my colleague Senator Sheldon Whitehouse 
of the State of Rhode Island. He has been a leader on this topic in the 
subcommittee which he chairs on the Judiciary Committee, and we have 
cooperated in this effort.
  We will meet this week. This is not the first time the Judiciary 
Committee will be asked to issue subpoenas. They happened before under 
Republican leadership as well in a much different type of case. But the 
fact of the matter is, we have tried carefully and studiously to come 
up with this information the right way, and, unfortunately, we have not 
gotten the kind of results we wanted. A subpoena, we hope, will jar 
loose the information to explain exactly what happened with the gift-
giving by several individuals.