Allison Gill (7:24)
But then, like the guy, the Ruby Freeman and Shay Moss's lawyer showed him, he. He applied to New Hampshire Credit union this past year. When he said it Florida was his primary residence. And he's like, is this your signature on this application for a credit union? Where? He's like, yeah, that's my signature. And he's like, does this with the box that you checked that you're a resident of New Hampshire? He's like, I don't recall. Like, it's just, you know, fuck you. The judge hasn't ruled yet because there's still 90 minutes, I think, of cross or direct or I think cross, actually, that's going to come up. So they had to extend the hearing. So there'll be another one and we'll cover that on the next cleanup on aisle 45. But it was. It was pretty ridiculous. All right, we have a lot of news to get to today, so let's hit the hot notes. Hot notes. All right, first up, from Zoe Richards at NBC. As I predicted, a judicial organization that sets national policy for federal courts has rejected a request from two Democratic lawmakers to refer the Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to the Department of Justice over free travel and gifts from wealthy benefactors that were largely omitted from his financial disclosure forms, a violation of federal law. The group, which is called the Judicial Conference, sent identical letters Thursday to Senator Whitehouse, who chairs the Judiciary Committee on Federal Courts, and Representative Hank Johnson, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee on Courts in the House, who asked in 2023 to refer. They asked the Judicial Conference to refer Thomas to the attorney General for an investigation following the ProPublica reporting on free travel and gifts to Thomas by Harlan Crow and others. Judicial Conference secretary Robert Conrad Jr. Said Thomas had filed amended financial disclosures that addressed several issues identified in your letter and argued that there is legal uncertainty over whether the Judicial Conference has the authority to refer complaints about Supreme Court justices. Who does? Quote, because the Judicial Conference does not superintend the Supreme Court and because any effort to grant the Conference such authority would raise serious constitutional questions. One would expect Congress, at a minimum, to state any such directive clearly, but no such express directive appears in the provision. That's what Conrad said. He rejected similar requests Thursday from Citizens for Renewing America President Russ Vaught, President Elect Donald Trump's pick to lead the Office of Management and Budget, who filed an ethics complaint against Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson over allegations that she failed to disclose details about income from her husband's medical malpractice consulting. Conrad said both justices had amended their financial disclosures and that they have agreed to follow guidance issued to other federal judges. White House criticized Conrad's response, saying in a statement that it ultimately doesn't address the only real question the Judicial Conference should have been focused on for the nearly two years it spent on this matter. Is there reasonable cause to believe Justice Thomas willfully broke the disclosures law? By all appearances, the judicial branch is shirking its statutory duty to hold a Supreme Court justice accountable for ethics violations. That's what White House said. Johnson criticized the judicial conference, saying in a statement Friday that the letter, quote, in effect exempts Supreme Court justices from the financial reporting requirements that all other federal court judges are bound by law to follow. Johnson also pressed for the passage of the Supreme Court Ethics Recusal and Transparency act, which he said includes an enforcement mechanism and holds justices to the same rules followed by lower court judges. That legislation was blocked by Senate Republicans last year. Elliot Burke, an attorney for Clarence Thomas, said his client, quote, has fully complied with a new disclosure requirement after guidance issued in 2023 specified that a reporting exemption for personal hospitality gifts did not apply to gifts of transportation and at commercial properties. Rachel Cawley, a spokesperson for the Citizens for Renewing America, a conservative social welfare group, argued that the Judicial Conference's response that liberal justices were not following the ethics disclosure rules. She highlighted her group's effort to draw attention to the issue, saying in a statement that a think tank needs to file a complaint to get it covered and effect change. White House and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden made a direct plea to the Justice Department in July to criminally investigate whether Trump violated or, excuse me, Clarence Thomas, leave that in, because that is hysterical. It's always, it's always somebody violated federal ethics and tax laws. No such investigations were announced. The Supreme Court formally adopted a new ethics code in 2023, but more than a year later, questions have lingered over its enforcement and I knew the Judicial Conference was going to be a pile of because I went and I looked up who sits on the Judicial Conference, and it's all the former chief judges and the chief judges and other current chief judges. It's like 80%, 80% are conservative judges.
