Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) on Thursday asked Chief Justice John Roberts to testify in Congress about the court’s ethical standards amid a controversy surrounding Justice Clarence Thomas.
Durbin vowed to hold a hearing on May 2 on ethical rules at the high court after a ProPublica investigation revealed that Thomas took various luxury trips over the years paid for by Harlan Crow, a Dallas-based real estate developer who has donated millions to conservative causes.
“The time has come for a new public conversation on ways to restore confidence in the Court’s ethical standards. I invite you to join it, and I look forward to your response,” Durbin wrote in a letter to Roberts on Thursday, also inviting him to designate another justice in his place.
“I didn’t say I think it’s inappropriate, I’m just saying I would be surprised if he agreed to come. And I would support his decision not to come if that’s what he wanted to do,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the committee’s ranking member, told reporters on Thursday.
If Roberts does not voluntarily appear, Durbin said the absence of Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who sits on the committee, would prevent Democrats from subpoenaing the chief justice.
“It takes a majority. I don’t have a majority. There’s been no discussion of subpoenas for anyone at this point,” Durbin told reporters.
The Hill has reached out to a Supreme Court spokesperson for comment.
The recent Thomas controversy has stirred GOP unease while renewing calls among Democrats and judicial watchdog groups for Supreme ethics reform.
Under federal law, Supreme Court justices are required to file annual financial disclosures, but Thomas has publicly said he was advised that the trips fell into a personal hospitality exception. The federal judiciary’s policy-making arm last month clarified the exception, and Thomas said he will follow that guidance in the future.
Unlike other federal judges, the justices are not subject to a binding code of ethics. All Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats have called for such a move, but Roberts resisted doing so roughly a decade ago in his 2011 year-end report on the judiciary.
He wrote at the time that the code was a “starting point” but that it did not adequately answer some of the ethical considerations “unique” to the high court, also noting that the justices had never addressed whether Congress had the authority to impose ethical rules on the justices.
“Since then, there has been a steady stream of revelations regarding Justices falling short of the ethical standards expected of other federal judges and, indeed, of public servants generally,” Durbin wrote in the letter. “These problems were already apparent back in 2011, and the Court’s decade-long failure to address them has contributed to a crisis of public confidence. The status quo is no longer tenable.”
Al Weaver and Nathaniel Weixel contributed.