Senator explains how a lower court can put down the hammer on the Supreme Court corruption
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) has some options for holding the Supreme Court accountable that don't involve expanding the court or some of the other proposals from Democrats on curbing ethical problems.
Speaking on MSNBC Friday, host Katy Tur explained that the recent release of photos of Justice Samuel Alito's home showing insurrection flags has renewed public interest in justices recusing themselves when they have clear conflicts of interest. There was an upside-down American flag and an “Appeal to Heaven” flag, both of which were adopted by the attackers of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has summoned Chief Justice John Roberts to explain what's happening under his leadership.
Over the past few years, Justice Clarence Thomas has been discovered to have accepted expensive gifts from billionaires who have cases before the court.
READ MORE: 'Need the Senate': Republicans brush off worries of anti-Trump GOPer being an 'irritant'
The allegations of corruption of the court have diminished the body to such a degree that activists are suggesting simply ignoring the rulings of the High Court entirely.
Whitehouse said that Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham was working with him to ensure there were disclosure rules that were unambiguous for reporting the gifts that judges received.
"It was only when the charges became so significant that all of that went away and it went back to being tribal," he explained.
One of his problems, he explained, is that right-wing billionaires are funding groups that get the judges on the court, and then organizations that tell them what to do and decisions they must make on cases.
"I actually have argued two things: one, that there is a pattern that is impossible to explain or justify, of these justices following what they're told to do by these billionaires and the front groups through which they operate," he proposed.
"And second, that some of the decisions they have made stand on propositions that are so factually false that they can't, sort of stand any longer. The factual predicate, the factual basis for the decision, is absolutely irretrievably wrong. And we know that now, and so those decisions should fall simply because they stand on false facts," Whitehouse continued.
Tur asked how they could fall when the Supreme Court won't. Whitehouse agreed therein lies the problem, where the court won't clean up its mistakes.
"Should people follow those decisions?" she asked. "The court functions only because there's trust in it. That's the only way. We decide to bestow them the authority. We no longer trust court, where does that leave you?"
Whitehouse said that the country must follow the rule of law that oversees the nation. But that extends to the justices themselves, too.
"One of the ways you can follow the law is to go into the lower courts and challenge the Supreme Court's adequacy," he revealed. "And if they agree, they could say you know what, you're right, that stands on this factual proposition. I know that factual proposition to be false. Therefore, that is not a good precedent, and I'm not going to follow it. That is the rule of law way of solving this problem."
See the explanation below or at the link here.
Senator explains how a lower court can put down the hammer on the Supreme Court corruption youtu.be