The Archive

IN THIS EDITION

Senate Dems’ big SCOTUS whiff

GOP senators tell RNC: Let Hogan break from Trump

Hispanic Dems miffed at Biden’s border play

What to watch in today’s primaries

THE TOP

Senate Dems’ big SCOTUS whiff

Happy Tuesday morning.

It’s been more than a year since ProPublica first reported on Supreme Court justices’ alleged ethical lapses, setting off sweeping investigations helmed by the Democratic-led Senate Judiciary and Finance committees.

To date, Senate Democrats have failed to land a single meaningful punch on the high court. This is true even as new incidents emerge that call into question the impartiality of some of the court’s conservative-leaning justices.

Judiciary Committee Democrats met privately after Senate votes Monday night to discuss this issue. Top Democrats continue to insist that the best path forward remains for the Senate to take up a bill that has zero chance of passing — legislation mandating an enforceable code of conduct for the court.

For now, Democrats’ strategy is to continue to raise public awareness while at the same time tempering expectations.

“There are precedents as to what we can and cannot do. But I think the American people have a clear understanding of some of the unethical conduct of several justices,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said.

Durbin added: “I want all of the members and the public to be realistic about what this issue involves. It really is a court issue that should be resolved by the chief justice.”

Persistent roadblocks: To be sure, Democrats’ failure to extract a win here isn’t for lack of trying. Republican senators, the justices themselves and even subpoena targets have stymied Democrats’ requests at every turn. Led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Republicans accuse Democrats of trying to undermine the high court’s independence.

In fact, Republicans openly said conservative activists Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow, who were subpoenaed for details about their financial ties to conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, should ignore the subpoenas.

The justices themselves also haven’t been shy about dismissing the idea that Congress has a direct oversight role over the Supreme Court, citing separation of powers arguments. Chief Justice John Roberts rejected a request to meet with Durbin. Last year, Roberts also declined to testify before the Judiciary Committee. And Alito, the latest target of Democrats’ ire, claims Congress doesn’t have the authority to enact an ethics code.

In November, Democrats got a modest victory when Roberts said the justices had agreed to a voluntary code of conduct. But it lacked an enforcement mechanism, so Democrats were far from satisfied.

There’s an argument to be made that Democrats could be doing more but are choosing not to out of fear of upending the bipartisanship that drives much of what the Senate does at the committee level.

The power of the purse: If Democrats wanted to go at this issue harder, they could use the appropriations process to force the Court to adopt an enforceable ethics code — something Democrats flirted with during the FY2024 funding stretch last year.

Of course, that would mean blowing up the bipartisan appropriations process that has given the Senate a leg up in spending fights with the House, where partisan funding bills are the norm.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who leads the Appropriations subcommittee that handles funding for the federal judiciary, told us Monday he wants to “renew” the conversation over tying SCOTUS funding to the adoption of a more stringent ethics code.

Van Hollen lamented that Democrats couldn’t get this done last year, attributing it to a desire by Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the ranking member, to avoid partisan amendments.

All indications are that this year’s funding process will be no different.

“Sen. Murray and Sen. Collins have said from the beginning, no poison pills,” Van Hollen said. “I can’t tell you that we’ve overcome that obstacle right now.”

The subpoena conundrum: Democrats could also try to subpoena the justices. But it’s unclear whether subpoenas would have the support of every Democratic Judiciary Committee member. And Durbin noted that subpoenas aren’t enforceable without 60 votes on the Senate floor.

“There are some people who don’t understand the Senate Judiciary Committee procedural rules,” Durbin lamented. “Keep in mind it’s a separate branch of government. It has its own authority.”

Of course, there’s a longstanding precedent of Supreme Court justices testifying before Congress on a host of matters. So lawmakers are tiptoeing around the question while the court continues to isolate itself. One top Democrat referred to it as a “chronic condition” that requires persistence to properly address.

“The justices obviously don’t want to talk about their problems, but their problems are not going away,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) told us. “One bad moment is no discouragement.”

Also — Bibi, or not: We reported Monday that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would address Congress on June 13. Speaker Mike Johnson’s team had already begun telling other congressional leaders the date was locked. Netanyahu, however, has waffled on the date because it’s the second day of the Jewish holiday of Shavuot. There was something clearly lost in translation between Washington and Jerusalem and the two sides are now looking for a new date.

— Andrew Desiderio and Max Cohen

ICYMI: The Readback, our new weekend roundup, is out now. Check out the first edition here.

Join Punchbowl News Texts! Get the breaking news directly from the Capitol to your phone. Only the info you need when you need it. For Premium members only — sign up today!

THE SENATE

GOP senators tell RNC: Let Hogan break from Trump

It’s a familiar spot for Senate Republicans — watching their party and its voters seemingly prioritize loyalty to former President Donald Trump over winning the Senate majority.

It was a problem in 2020 when Trump forced GOP candidates to parrot his lies about the presidential election and essentially handed both of Georgia’s Senate seats to Democrats.

And it was a problem in 2022 when Trump’s preferred candidates won GOP primaries — without resistance from the NRSC — and couldn’t win the general election.

Now, Republican senators are contending with an RNC co-chair who’s trashing Larry Hogan, the GOP candidate with the best chance in decades to flip a Senate seat in deep-blue Maryland. All because he didn’t toe the party line on Trump’s conviction in his New York hush-money trial.

Appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, RNC co-chair Lara Trump said Hogan “doesn’t deserve the respect of anyone in the Republican Party” over his refusal to condemn the former president’s conviction.

The nightmare scenario for GOP senators here is that loyalty to Trump once again becomes the priority, at the expense of a Senate majority. Many Republican senators believe this is exactly why they lost in 2020 and 2022.

Their message this time around: Let Hogan break from Trump when he needs to.

“We’ve got to give him latitude to win his race in Maryland,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said. “What we don’t want to do is have a scenario where we win the White House and we don’t have a majority in the Senate. That would make no sense at all. President Trump would get nothing done.”

NRSC Chair Steve Daines was even more blunt, telling us: “Larry Hogan is running for the U.S. Senate in Maryland, not Mississippi.”

Trump allies respond: Not every GOP senator expressed frustration with Lara Trump’s comments.

Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), a major Trump ally, said that while he hopes Hogan wins in Maryland, Hogan’s comments about Trump’s conviction were “a huge mistake.”

“He obviously is going to run a different campaign than I would run,” Vance acknowledged. “But look, when he says things that alienate the majority of Republicans… I think it’s certainly reasonable to criticize him. I still hope he wins.”

— Andrew Desiderio and Max Cohen

DEMOCRATIC WATCH

Hispanic Dems miffed at Biden’s border play

Hispanic Democrats are frustrated that the White House’s proposed executive order restricting asylum fails to take into account the Congressional Hispanic Caucus’ immigration reform priorities.

Lawmakers we spoke to on Monday criticized President Joe Biden for what they perceive as an “enforcement-first” border policy. The simmering tension is the latest flashpoint in months of unhappiness between the CHC and the administration over the ongoing crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Biden is expected to roll out an executive order today that would allow the president to cut off asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border. The shutdown would be triggered if more than 2,500 migrants cross in one day.

Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) said the order would be detrimental to the Biden campaign’s standing with Hispanic voters.

“There’s enough voters out there generally that don’t want to see any of the Trump-era policies back that liken this to the Muslim ban,” Garcia said.

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) also criticized the proposal, arguing Biden is “paralleling some of what the Trump administration tried to do unsuccessfully.”

Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) said he was willing to publicly push back on Biden if he pursues hardline immigration policies.

“It’s not going to help the president politically because I don’t think Fox News is ever going to give him any credit,” Casar told us. “What we should do is have an actual thoughtful plan that is both pro-border and pro-immigrant.”

The public frustration comes two weeks after senior congressional Hispanic leaders met with Biden and other White House officials to pitch their ideas on immigration reform. During the meeting, Biden officials promised to satisfy some of the Democrats’ immigration-related asks before the election.

But those private assurances aren’t enough for some members.

“Looking at just an enforcement-only EO would be disappointing,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said.

To be sure, the executive order is supported by portions of the House Democratic Caucus. Several Democrats were invited to the White House later today as Biden announced his plan — although not all are going. But a consistent theme from many Democrats we spoke to was a lack of clarity on what is in the order itself, despite Biden officials briefing many lawmakers in recent days.

“I anticipate it would be a good part of what was in the bipartisan Senate proposal that never made it,” Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), who plans to attend the White House ceremony, told us.

— Max Cohen and Mica Soellner

PRIMARY PREVIEW

What to watch in today’s primaries

It’s primary day in Iowa, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota. Here’s what we’re tracking today:

Who will follow Rosendale? A crowded field is vying to replace Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) in Montana’s ruby-red 2nd District. State Auditor Troy Downing is a leading contender in the Republican primary. A number of House conservatives, including Freedom Caucus Chair Bob Good (R-Va.), have endorsed the state’s Superintendent of Public Instruction Elsie Arntzen. Former Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) is also running to return to Congress, along with retired DEA agent Stacy Zinn.

Will Iowa Republicans beat back their right-wing challengers? Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-Iowa) is the favorite to dispatch Kevin Virgil, a hardline conservative looking to oust the incumbent. Notably, Virgil is endorsed by former Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa). Feenstra beat King in a primary following public outrage over King’s racist comments. Former 2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy is also backing Virgil.

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-Iowa) is also facing a longshot challenge from the right in the shape of David Pautsch.

Who will replace Kim? Rep. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) vacated the 3rd District to run for Senate, leaving two Democrats — Herb Conaway Jr. and Carol Murphy — as leading contenders to replace him. Conaway Jr., a state assembly member, is backed by 314 Action Fund and VoteVets. Murphy, also a state legislator, has the backing of EMILYs List.

— Max Cohen

THE CAMPAIGN

Whitmer, Evers boost Biden on the air

New: Liberal group Evergreen Collaborative is launching a seven-figure ad buy in Michigan and Wisconsin highlighting the impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act.

In the Wolverine State ad — running in the Flint and Grand Rapids media markets — Michigan Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer touts that because of the IRA, Michigan manufacturers are making more electric vehicle parts.

“It’s good for our health, good for our economy and it’s putting Michigan in the driver’s seat,” Whitmer says.

The Wisconsin ad, which is airing in Milwaukee and seeks to boost Gov. Tony Evers, hails that IRA provisions are leading to increased home values and lower energy bills.

Michigan and Wisconsin are two of the top presidential battleground states this fall. Both are holding consequential Senate elections and will have competitive House races too.

Also: Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) will travel to Ohio on June 9-10 to boost Democrats running for Congress and local offices. As we previously reported, Clyburn has amped up his efforts to help the Biden campaign, especially among Black voters.

— Max Cohen and Mica Soellner

MOMENTS

CLIPS