Democrats hit the brakes on plans to subpoena conservative legal scholar Leonard Leo and billionaire Harlan Crow during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill Thursday, scoring a win for the integrity of the Supreme Court.
After Judiciary Committee postponed SCOTUS-related subpoenas, Chair Durbin says Dems will "absolutely" try again
— Burgess Everett (@burgessev) November 9, 2023
"The problem was these amendments we didn't know until last night ... we ran out of time," he says
Tillis view of Dems: "they decided probably wasn't worth it"
The move came after Republican Ranking Member Lindsey Graham warned Chairman Dick Durbin and other Democrats that their efforts to intimidate friends and acquaintances of conservative Supreme Court Justices, specifically Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito under the guise of "ethics reform," would backfire.
"I promise you, everything that was working well with the committee is now in jeopardy," Graham warned. "You’re going to have a complete sh*t show but if that’s what you want that’s what you’re gonna get."
"You've opened up Pandora's box and you'll get a look into it and it's not very pretty." - Senator @LindseyGrahamSC pic.twitter.com/uzUdo7zVda
— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) November 9, 2023
Earlier in the week Durbin vowed to issue subpoenas to Leonard and Crow, claiming it was key to congressional oversight of the Supreme Court. Notably, Durbin had no intention of issuing the same to rich and powerful friends of liberal justices.
I just unveiled my intended motion to issue subpoenas to Harlan Crow, Leonard Leo, and Robin Arkley II.
— Senator Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) November 2, 2023
This kickstarts debate and the next steps to a full committee vote, as soon as next week. pic.twitter.com/Mtdylc8qCg
Leonard and Crow strongly pushed back on the inquiry.
From Crow's office:
“It’s disappointing that one party on the Committee would choose to pursue an unnecessary, partisan, and politically motivated subpoena instead of simply reciprocating Mr. Crow’s good faith efforts at a reasonable compromise that respects both sides. We offered extensive information responsive to the Committee’s requests despite the serious constitutional and privacy concerns presented to the Committee, which were ignored and remain unaddressed. Notably, the Committee has already passed the legislation for which it says the information it has requested is supposedly necessary. It’s clear this is nothing more than a stunt aimed at undermining a sitting Supreme Court Justice for ideological and political purposes. Mr. Crow, a private citizen, won’t be bullied by threats from politicians. However, as previously conveyed to the Committee, we remain committed to respectful cooperation and a fair resolution.”
From Attorneys for Leo:
"Your investigation of Mr. Leo infringes two provisions of the Bill of Rights. By selectively targeting Mr. Leo for investigation on a politically charged basis, while ignoring other potential sources of information on the asserted topic of interest who are similarly situated to Mr. Leo but have different political views that are more consistent with those of the Committee majority, your inquiry appears to be political retaliation against a private citizen in violation of the First Amendment."
"For similar reasons, your inquiry cannot be reconciled with the Equal Protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. And regardless of its other constitutional infirmities, it appears that your investigation lacks a valid legislative purpose, because the legislation the Committee is considering would be unconstitutional if enacted."