39,315 views Apr 28, 2023
All 11 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have sent a letter filled with questions for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. Earlier this week, Roberts said that he would not be attending a hearing to answer questions about the ethical/legal problems of Clarence Thomas, but that was prior to more information coming out about both Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.
This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos. Democrats in the Senate. In fact, all 11 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are not happy with Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, excuse for not coming in and talking to them about the blatant corruption of Justices Clarence Thomas. And of course, as we learned this week, Neil Gorsuch. And so these 11 Democrats sent a letter with some questions that they would like John Roberts to answer. Basically saying like, if you're not gonna come in here and answer our questions, perhaps you'd prefer to do it from the comfort of your own home, and you can write them down and just send them back at your leisure. But the reason the Democrats are doing this is because in his rejection letter that he sent to the Senate where he is like, yeah, I'm not coming in, he mentioned something that has actually raised a lot of questions with those Democrats in the Senate. He said, Hey, listen, there's a code of ethics for the lower courts, not for the Supreme Court, but I, I assure you, you know our Supreme Court like we subscribe to that as well. Now, if you subscribe to something, just so everybody knows, like you can cancel a subscription at any time. So that's not actually what the Democrats wanted to say, but I just wanted to point that out because he didn't say we, we strongly adhere to them. We go by that same code. He say, we subscribe to it too, you know, until it's inconvenient. And then we just unsubscribe. So the Democrats shut back in the letter saying this, the statement of principles raises more questions than it resolves. And we request that you respond to several key questions. For example, if you go by the same code of ethics that the lower federal courts have to go through, quote, what is the consequence, if any, for a sitting justice who does not respond as appropriate to such a letter of inquiry? So they're not even trying to like put it on Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, the like. All right, if you subscribe to that code of ethics, right? You do know that if we send a letter of inquiry to these folks, they're legally obligated to respond to it. And we've sent a letter of inquiry to you. So you tell us what happens to those lower court judges when they don't answer the questions. I think that's pre, like, that's a gut punch. That was pretty good. Look, I'm hard on Democrats, rightfully so, but I gotta tell you, putting that out there in the ether, being like, all right, tough guy, you adhere to this code of ethics. What happens to those guys? If we ask them questions and they don't answer? Yeah, they get in trouble. But why don't you tell us that? Cuz you said you follow the same rules. And thereby, if you do not answer that question, then we're going to assume that you're gonna hold yourself to the same standard that those other Judges would be held to if they refuse to answer questions from US. Senators pretty big Gotcha question there. Another question is, uh, what types of penalties have been or may be imposed? Is there a process by which the public may file and the Supreme Court may receive complaints that a justice has failed to abide by these principles? The Democrats, again, to their credit, they're kind of going pretty hard against this guy. And I love it because the public needs this. John Roberts is an absolute coward for not showing up in front of that Senate and answering those questions. Now, the s uh uh, the Supreme Court is not like the Senate.
