SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
United States Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (L) and Associate Justice Samuel Alito (R) pose for an official portrait at the East Conference Room in the Supreme Court building on October 7, 2022 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Calls for SCOTUS Ethics Probe Grow as Court Lawyer Defends Alito
"Supreme Court justices have avoided accountability for too long," said one critic. "It's time for our elected officials to do their job, and serve as a true check on the judiciary."
Nov 29, 2022
Demands for a congressional investigation into potential ethics violations at the U.S. Supreme Court intensified Monday after a lawyer for the court refused to answer questions from two lawmakers about allegations regarding Justice Samuel Alito.
Ethan Torrey, legal counsel for the high court, responded to a letter from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) dated November 20, in which the lawmakers had asked a series of questions about a bombshell New York Times report detailing a former anti-abortion activist's efforts to gain access to Supreme Court justices.
"'There is nothing to suggest that Justice Alito's actions violated ethical standards' is laughable, even for SCOTUS, which refuses to take its ethics seriously."
Rev. Rob Schenck, former president of right-wing group Faith & Action, described to the Times how he urged his group's supporters to donate to the Supreme Court Historical Society and attend its events. He also alleged that Alito leaked the court's decision in the contraception-related case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to Faith & Action donors.
Whitehouse and Johnson, who respectively chair the Senate and House Judiciary Courts Subcommittees, asked Chief Justice John Roberts and Torrey to explain whether "the Supreme Court opened an investigation into any of the allegations set forth" by Schenck and whether the court has "reevaluated any of its practices, procedures, or rules related to judicial ethics, or the justices' receipt and reporting of gifts and travel."
"Who is responsible for policing the relationship between the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Historical Society to ensure that paid membership in the Society is not used as a means of gaining undue influence?" the lawmakers asked.
Torrey's letter on Monday did not address Whitehouse and Johnson's questions, instead simply reiterating an earlier denial of wrongdoing by Alito himself.
"Justice Alito has said that neither he nor Mrs. Alito told [Faith & Action donors] the Wrights about the outcome in the Hobby Lobby case," Torrey said. "The justice never detected any effort on the part of the Wrights to obtain confidential information or to influence anything he did in either an official or personal capacity."
Torrey also wrote that the Wrights had not had a "financial interest" in the Hobby Lobby case or other cases before the court, suggesting that therefore, Alito could not have violated ethics rules by "accepting meals and lodging" from the couple.
Chris Kang, chief counsel of court reform group Demand Justice, called the claim that "there is nothing to suggest" an ethical breach "laughable."
Torrey's dismissal of Whitehouse and Johnson's concerns and his refusal to launch a probe made it clear that congressional committees tasked with overseeing the courts "must respond with an actual investigation," Kang said.
In their earlier letter to Roberts and Torrey, the lawmakers wrote that if the court "is not willing to undertake fact-finding inquiries into possible ethics violations that leaves Congress as the only forum."
In response to Torrey's letter on Tuesday, Johnson and Whitehouse did not indicate whether they will actually launch a congressional probe now that the court has refused to conduct one.
"Through legal counsel, the Supreme Court reiterated Justice Alito's denials but did not substantively answer any of our questions," said the lawmakers. "The court's letter is an embodiment of the problems at the court around ethics issues."
Johnson, Whitehouse, and the public "don't have to just take Sam Alito at his word," said Molly Coleman, executive director of the People's Parity Project. "Congress can--and must--investigate."
"Supreme Court justices have avoided accountability for too long," said Coleman. "It's time for our elected officials to do their job, and serve as a true check on the judiciary."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Demands for a congressional investigation into potential ethics violations at the U.S. Supreme Court intensified Monday after a lawyer for the court refused to answer questions from two lawmakers about allegations regarding Justice Samuel Alito.
Ethan Torrey, legal counsel for the high court, responded to a letter from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) dated November 20, in which the lawmakers had asked a series of questions about a bombshell New York Times report detailing a former anti-abortion activist's efforts to gain access to Supreme Court justices.
"'There is nothing to suggest that Justice Alito's actions violated ethical standards' is laughable, even for SCOTUS, which refuses to take its ethics seriously."
Rev. Rob Schenck, former president of right-wing group Faith & Action, described to the Times how he urged his group's supporters to donate to the Supreme Court Historical Society and attend its events. He also alleged that Alito leaked the court's decision in the contraception-related case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to Faith & Action donors.
Whitehouse and Johnson, who respectively chair the Senate and House Judiciary Courts Subcommittees, asked Chief Justice John Roberts and Torrey to explain whether "the Supreme Court opened an investigation into any of the allegations set forth" by Schenck and whether the court has "reevaluated any of its practices, procedures, or rules related to judicial ethics, or the justices' receipt and reporting of gifts and travel."
"Who is responsible for policing the relationship between the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Historical Society to ensure that paid membership in the Society is not used as a means of gaining undue influence?" the lawmakers asked.
Torrey's letter on Monday did not address Whitehouse and Johnson's questions, instead simply reiterating an earlier denial of wrongdoing by Alito himself.
"Justice Alito has said that neither he nor Mrs. Alito told [Faith & Action donors] the Wrights about the outcome in the Hobby Lobby case," Torrey said. "The justice never detected any effort on the part of the Wrights to obtain confidential information or to influence anything he did in either an official or personal capacity."
Torrey also wrote that the Wrights had not had a "financial interest" in the Hobby Lobby case or other cases before the court, suggesting that therefore, Alito could not have violated ethics rules by "accepting meals and lodging" from the couple.
Chris Kang, chief counsel of court reform group Demand Justice, called the claim that "there is nothing to suggest" an ethical breach "laughable."
Torrey's dismissal of Whitehouse and Johnson's concerns and his refusal to launch a probe made it clear that congressional committees tasked with overseeing the courts "must respond with an actual investigation," Kang said.
In their earlier letter to Roberts and Torrey, the lawmakers wrote that if the court "is not willing to undertake fact-finding inquiries into possible ethics violations that leaves Congress as the only forum."
In response to Torrey's letter on Tuesday, Johnson and Whitehouse did not indicate whether they will actually launch a congressional probe now that the court has refused to conduct one.
"Through legal counsel, the Supreme Court reiterated Justice Alito's denials but did not substantively answer any of our questions," said the lawmakers. "The court's letter is an embodiment of the problems at the court around ethics issues."
Johnson, Whitehouse, and the public "don't have to just take Sam Alito at his word," said Molly Coleman, executive director of the People's Parity Project. "Congress can--and must--investigate."
"Supreme Court justices have avoided accountability for too long," said Coleman. "It's time for our elected officials to do their job, and serve as a true check on the judiciary."
Demands for a congressional investigation into potential ethics violations at the U.S. Supreme Court intensified Monday after a lawyer for the court refused to answer questions from two lawmakers about allegations regarding Justice Samuel Alito.
Ethan Torrey, legal counsel for the high court, responded to a letter from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) dated November 20, in which the lawmakers had asked a series of questions about a bombshell New York Times report detailing a former anti-abortion activist's efforts to gain access to Supreme Court justices.
"'There is nothing to suggest that Justice Alito's actions violated ethical standards' is laughable, even for SCOTUS, which refuses to take its ethics seriously."
Rev. Rob Schenck, former president of right-wing group Faith & Action, described to the Times how he urged his group's supporters to donate to the Supreme Court Historical Society and attend its events. He also alleged that Alito leaked the court's decision in the contraception-related case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to Faith & Action donors.
Whitehouse and Johnson, who respectively chair the Senate and House Judiciary Courts Subcommittees, asked Chief Justice John Roberts and Torrey to explain whether "the Supreme Court opened an investigation into any of the allegations set forth" by Schenck and whether the court has "reevaluated any of its practices, procedures, or rules related to judicial ethics, or the justices' receipt and reporting of gifts and travel."
"Who is responsible for policing the relationship between the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Historical Society to ensure that paid membership in the Society is not used as a means of gaining undue influence?" the lawmakers asked.
Torrey's letter on Monday did not address Whitehouse and Johnson's questions, instead simply reiterating an earlier denial of wrongdoing by Alito himself.
"Justice Alito has said that neither he nor Mrs. Alito told [Faith & Action donors] the Wrights about the outcome in the Hobby Lobby case," Torrey said. "The justice never detected any effort on the part of the Wrights to obtain confidential information or to influence anything he did in either an official or personal capacity."
Torrey also wrote that the Wrights had not had a "financial interest" in the Hobby Lobby case or other cases before the court, suggesting that therefore, Alito could not have violated ethics rules by "accepting meals and lodging" from the couple.
Chris Kang, chief counsel of court reform group Demand Justice, called the claim that "there is nothing to suggest" an ethical breach "laughable."
Torrey's dismissal of Whitehouse and Johnson's concerns and his refusal to launch a probe made it clear that congressional committees tasked with overseeing the courts "must respond with an actual investigation," Kang said.
In their earlier letter to Roberts and Torrey, the lawmakers wrote that if the court "is not willing to undertake fact-finding inquiries into possible ethics violations that leaves Congress as the only forum."
In response to Torrey's letter on Tuesday, Johnson and Whitehouse did not indicate whether they will actually launch a congressional probe now that the court has refused to conduct one.
"Through legal counsel, the Supreme Court reiterated Justice Alito's denials but did not substantively answer any of our questions," said the lawmakers. "The court's letter is an embodiment of the problems at the court around ethics issues."
Johnson, Whitehouse, and the public "don't have to just take Sam Alito at his word," said Molly Coleman, executive director of the People's Parity Project. "Congress can--and must--investigate."
"Supreme Court justices have avoided accountability for too long," said Coleman. "It's time for our elected officials to do their job, and serve as a true check on the judiciary."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.