WASHINGTON (CN) — It was a grim scene in the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday morning, as Republican anger over Democrats’ push to subpoena figures central to their Supreme Court ethics inquiry threatened to melt away the panel’s thin veneer of bipartisanship.
The upper chamber’s legal affairs committee, tasked with approving the Biden administration’s nominees for federal court vacancies, has for months enjoyed some rare goodwill between Democrats and Republicans. That bipartisan tenor so far has helped the panel advance dozens of White House appointees with cross-aisle support.
Those good feelings have been stretched to their breaking point this week; Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin announced he would seek authorization to subpoena a trio of prominent conservative figures who Democrats say have had unethical relationships with justices of the Supreme Court.
The committee has for months been investigating reports that some of the high court’s jurists failed to disclose high-dollar gifts from wealthy benefactors, including billionaire megadonors Harlan Crow and Robin Arkley, as well as conservative legal activist and Federalist Society founder Leonard Leo.
Democrats’ demands that Crow, Arkley and Leo turn over information about their relationships with Supreme Court justices have been met with resistance. Durbin has framed his proposed subpoenas — legal summons that would force the three men to comply — as a last resort.
But for Republicans, subpoenas are a bridge too far.
“You have lost your way,” seethed South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham during a Judiciary Committee business meeting Thursday morning.
Graham, the panel’s ranking member, rehashed an argument now familiar among opponents of Democrats’ Supreme Court ethics inquiry: that any attempt to regulate business of the court would violate constitutional separation of powers.
“You’re trying to manage the Supreme Court,” the senator said. “I wouldn’t let y’all manage anything. You’re trying to create a political issue that I think crosses constitutional boundaries.”
Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley piled on, saying Democrats’ probe is “part of a campaign by the left to harass and intimidate the Supreme Court because they don’t like some of its recent decisions.”
“Unfortunately, this request for subpoena authorization is just more of the same,” he added.
The Judiciary Committee was scheduled to vote Thursday on authorizing subpoenas for Crow, Arkley and Leo, but Durbin said the panel would delay such action until next week, citing a request from committee Republicans.
Visibly incensed, Graham made it clear that the minority would not go down without a fight. “You better eat breakfast next Thursday,” he told the committee, “because you’re not going anywhere.”
The lawmaker also appeared to put the GOP’s future cooperation with committee leadership on the table.
“From here on out, this committee is going to operate differently,” Graham said. “Starting next Thursday, it is going to be harder, not easier. This is a fight you want — and you’re going to get it.”
Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton threatened Democrats with a political retaliation strike. “The shoe will be on the other foot one day,” he said. “Go ahead, issue a subpoena. We’ll see what happens when we take back the majority.”
Republicans also suggested that Democrats would eventually try to subpoena Justice Clarence Thomas, who was implicated in ethically questionable conduct, and force the jurist to testify before Congress.
Durbin for his part refused to address the possibility, but did not explicitly rule it out.
“Our endgame is to follow the facts,” he said. “We cannot accumulate the facts without the cooperation of the witnesses. We’ve done everything we can to try to get voluntary cooperation.”
Durbin pushed back on claims that Democrats were taking such a drastic step for political purposes.
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
