On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee did their markup on "ethics" legislation that is targeting the U.S. Supreme Court, all while hit pieces have come out against the conservative justices, especially Justice Clarence Thomas. Republicans have vowed to block it from passing. While the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal and Transparency Act did only pass out of Committee with votes from all Democrats, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) got an amendment in there that condemned racism against Thomas.
KENNEDY: Democrats’ SCOTUS Ethics Bill “is dead as fried chicken!” pic.twitter.com/aVrC5xxy26
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) July 19, 2023
The amendment passed unanimously, which might be somewhat surprising, given that Democrats themselves are the ones who have gone after Thomas with such vitriol, as has been brought up at previous hearings. They also took some time in getting there with their support. As is the case whenever Kennedy makes a point, his remarks about the amendment are one for the ages.
Kennedy needed to dumb it down for Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) who needed clarification that the amendment would only refer to Thomas, as she insisted in bringing up "we condemn racism against any justice."
"I don't understand the reluctance to accept the fact that Justice Clarence Thomas, who happens to be a black man, has been the butt of a lot of racist statements. And I don't understand reluctance to condemn those. And that's what my amendment does," Kennedy pointed out, as he went on to make clear "I don't want it watered down, I don't want to bubble wrap it, I don't want to sugar coat it, I want to say, big as Dallas, the United States Senate condemns all these racist things that have been said against Justice Clarence Thomas."
Kennedy also reminded that another senator could simply put forth another amendment "to condemn every racist thing that has ever been said in the history of ever," which he would vote for.
It's not as if the examples aren't there. Less than a week before the markup took place, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who once served in the U.S. House of Representatives, likened Thomas to the house slave Stephen in "Django Unchained," who turned on his fellow slaves and was loyal to his sadistic master to the very end.
"Are there are any of the other nine justices who have been subject to such racist attack in the last few days from a sitting Democrat in the state of Minnesota, who disgusting--has anyone else been subject to those kind of attacks as frequently, as brazenly, and as unapologetically," Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) asked Kennedy during the time that had been yielded to him.
Kennedy in his response emphasized "it would be unconscionable for this Committee not to condemn this kind of rhetoric against Clarence Thomas!
. @SenJohnKennedy offered an amendment condemning racist comments made against Justice Clarence Thomas by Democrats like Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison likening Thomas to a house slave.
— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) July 20, 2023
*Senator Whitehouse encouraged all Democrats to vote against the amendment* pic.twitter.com/kebDR3BVyN
Shockingly, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) "urged my fellow colleagues to vote no," since he claimed "I consider this to be not relevant to the matter at hand, and further it specifically requests the Biden administration to inject itself politically into a law enforcement decision that the Biden administration, I think quite properly, has avoided getting involved with."
Kennedy became increasingly passionate as the discussion went on, reminding that the scope of the amendment is condemning such remarks like those from Ellison. "I mean does anybody here support that kind of rhetoric? I don't! I don't think you do! And this kind of rhetoric hasn't been directed towards... John Roberts... Neil Gorsuch, it's been directed towards Clarence Thomas! And it's un-American, it's unconscionable, and I can't believe we wouldn't condemn it!"
"I don't care how many lawyers can dance on the head of a pin," Kennedy said, responding to Whitehouse's callous reasons given for why the amendment shouldn't pass. "Don't-don't try to pretend that this is, uh, some sort of a, uh, technical, um, mistake in this amendment! It's not complicated! You don't have to be a senior at Cal Tech to figure it out!"
As he reminded once more, his amendment "says all of this stuff at Clarence Thomas, calling him a house slave, and all other racist, disgusting statements, we condemn! Now you either condemn it, or you don't. And that's all this amendment does."
Whitehouse, in response, claimed that he does condemn such rhetoric, but explained that his issue was with the amendment calling on the Biden administration to protect the justices.
Responding once more, Kennedy again emphasized "is a real simple amendment," and pointed out that "if you support the racist things that have been said against Clarence Thomas, then vote against this amendment. If you think the things that have been said about Clarence Thomas are racist to the marrow and you condemn them, then vote for this amendment."
Cruz would later speak to address the arguments against the amendment. When it comes to Klobuchar's concerns, Cruz offered "I would point out objectively the venom and the bigotry directed at Clarence Thomas is qualitatively different than any of the other eight justices," explaining that the resolution gave multiple instances of such examples.
In response to Whitehouse's arguments, Cruz also highlighted the absurdity of Whitehouse saying "'well, the part that is offensive of this is that it calls on the Department of Justice to enforce the law.' Just stop and repeat that to yourself again.So now it is the position of Democrats that it is unacceptable for the Department of Justice to enforce the law!"
You either condemn the racist attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas, or you don’t.
— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) July 20, 2023
After a long discussion today, my Democrat colleagues on the Judiciary Committee finally agreed to condemn the disgusting racism that many have aimed at Justice Thomas. pic.twitter.com/tBptrybb0q
With such a focus, Whitehouse reminded that the Biden administration, despite how he believes they behaved "quite properly," has taken a hands off approach when it comes to better protecting conservative justices, which has been sharply criticized, including by Cruz.
After somebody leaked the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on May 2, 2022, protests began illegally protesting at the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices almost immediately. Then White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki downplayed the severity, and instead emphasized how people were upset and there was a lot of "passion" about the ramifications of Roe being overturned. She also indicated we "continue to encourage" people to picket.
In early June of last year, in reaction to Dobbs, someone showed up with the intent to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and looked to target other conservative justices.
While Whitehouse defended the Biden administration's approach, such an approach resulted in U.S. marshals being directed to "to avoid, unless absolutely necessary, any criminal enforcement."
Oh, So That's Why Leftists Weren't Arrested Outside the Homes of Supreme Court Justices https://t.co/ExE8blnZGw
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) May 3, 2023
Join the conversation as a VIP Member