Democrats ask Supreme Court Historical Society for information on donors, access to justices

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are asking the Supreme Court Historical Society for information on its donors, its events and the extent of the access it grants exclusive members to justices on the court.

The letter from Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) comes as the panel works to craft new legislation strengthening ethics standards for the court.

It also follows a series of reports that Supreme Court justices have accepted lodging and travel gifts from various parties.

The two Democrats noted that a report in The New York Times last year said donors to the society had been granted access to justices.

“Last year, the New York Times reported about access that donors to the Supreme Court Historical Society (“Society”) have to Justices. We therefore write to request information regarding the ways in which the Society provides such access to its donors,” the letter states.

Durbin and Whitehouse noted the Times had reported that the society organizes events promising access to justices.

“Notably, not all of these events are open to the general public, allowing special access to donors,” the two wrote.

“Regardless of the intentions behind this access, the ability of those with interests before the Court to obtain special access to the Justices—that is not available to all Americans—at minimum creates an appearance of undue influence that undermines the public’s trust in the Court’s impartiality,” Durbin and Whitehouse wrote.

They provided a list of questions and requested a response from the society’s president, Chilton Davis Varner, no later than July 25, 2023. 

They asked for a full list of current and former members and officers to the society and the length of their service.

They also wanted details of the events attended by any Supreme Court justice for the last 20 years — when the event took place, which justice attended and whether the events were open to the general public. If they were not open to the public, the senators asked whether “attendance was restricted” to “those who donated above a certain amount and what the donation amount was.” 

“Maintaining faith in the impartiality of the federal judiciary is a necessary prerequisite for preserving the rule of law. In the absence of action by the Supreme Court to address shortcomings in its ethical standards and practices, Congress must act to restore faith in the Court by passing legislation that addresses those shortcomings,” Durbin and Whitehouse wrote.

“The information requested by this letter will help clarify the full scope of ethical concerns that the legislation must address,” they added.