Top Dem plots tying SCOTUS funding to ‘enforceable' ethics code amid Thomas, Alito controversies

A top Senate appropriator is considering fencing off operational funding for the Supreme Court in the fiscal year 2025 spending bill and forcing the court to enforce an ethics code in order to access it following controversies over Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito's wives' political behavior and gifts the justices have been given by wealthy friends. 

In the next appropriations measure to fund the "general government," which includes the Supreme Court, the appropriations subcommittee chairman is "definitely" looking into reviving a proposal this year to compel the court to implement an enforceable code of ethics.

The Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government Chairman Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., told Fox News Digital on Thursday about a proposal he advanced last year "to fence [off] some of the Supreme Court funding," except for money for protection. 

TESTER DENIES TIGHT RACE, SAYS INTERNAL POLLING HAS HIM BEATING SHEEHY: ’KICKING HIS A--’

His idea at the time was to fence off some of the court's operational funding "until the Supreme Court implemented an enforceable code of ethics similar to that that applies to lower courts," he said.

Now, as the Supreme Court and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have come under renewed scrutiny for alleged unethical conduct, Van Hollen is "looking at doing that again."

Renewed calls from Democrats for an ethics code to be enforced for justices of the Supreme Court stacked up last year following a report that detailed Thomas' friendship with billionaire real estate tycoon Harlan Crow and some of the lavish gifts he'd received from him. 

BIDEN DRAGS DOWN MICHIGAN SENATE RACE AS COOK POLITICAL REPORT DECLARES 'TOSS UP'

The effort gained steam again this summer after reports earlier in the year about an upside-down American flag and an "Appeal to Heaven" flag that were flown at Alito's homes. Some claimed the upside-down American flag was a sign of support for those who rioted at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. However, Alito said the flag was flown by his wife in a dispute with a neighbor. 

Several Senate Democrats called on both Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves from cases having to do with the 2020 election, suggesting they cannot be impartial in the matter. In particular, the justices were asked to recuse from the matter of former President Trump's immunity, which was ruled on earlier this month. 

Neither Thomas nor Alito recused themselves from the case. In a 6-3 decision, the high court determined Trump has substantial immunity from prosecution as it relates to official acts that are committed while in office. The immunity does not extend to unofficial acts.

BLUMENTHAL SAYS SOME CONCERNS 'DEEPENED' AFTER MEETING WITH BIDEN CAMP ADVISERS

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., was one of the more vocal Democrats calling for their recusal. He told Fox News Digital earlier this summer that he heard "some discussion" about including the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act in the annual appropriations bill. 

"I think we should use every tool available to compel the Supreme Court to adopt a truly enforceable code of ethics," he said at the time.  

The bill has yet to be brought to the Senate floor for a vote, despite Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., having the ability to do so. Schumer's office didn't respond to a request for comment last month about whether he would take up the bill and if there was enough Democratic support to warrant doing so. 

DEM SENATOR HELPS BLOCK BIDEN JUDICIAL NOMINEE AMID CONTROVERSY OVER TRANSGENDER INMATE

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., has led his colleagues on the bill and advocated for its passage once again in the wake of the Alito controversy. The senator recently told Fox News Digital that he had spoken to Schumer about bringing the bill to the floor for a vote, but that it was dependent on scheduling. 

According to Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., who has joined calls to pass the legislation, his "preference" is not the route of appropriations. 

The senator said he'd rather "we have a straight-up discussion about Supreme Court ethics."

"Everybody should want a court that has credibility and respect for Republicans and Democrats, because all of us have to abide by the decisions they make," he explained last month. "So, I'd rather have a straight, standalone approach."