The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“U.S. Supreme Court (Executive Session)” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the in the Senate section section on pages S2466-S2467 on May 12.
The Department is one of the oldest in the US, focused primarily on law enforcement and the federal prison system. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, detailed wasteful expenses such as $16 muffins at conferences and board meetings.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
U.S. Supreme Court
Madam President, now on another matter, 2 years ago, the Democratic leader addressed a crowd on the steps of the Supreme Court and threatened Justices if they didn't rule the way he wanted. Now far-left crowds are surrounding Justices' private family homes. They want to use intimidation to influence the outcome in a pending case. It should be easy for leaders to condemn. All Americans should agree that judges and juries ought not to be subjected to threats or intimidation campaigns.
Admirably, some on the political left have spoken out against this fringe element. The Washington Post editorial board has condemned this. The No. 2 Senate Democrat, our colleague from Illinois, said:
I think it's reprehensible. Stay away from homes and families.
His counterpart across the Capitol, the No. 2 House Democrat, Leader Hoyer, said:
We need to protect Supreme Court Justices and their families, period. We're a nation of laws, not of violence, not of intimidation . . . laws.
That was Steny Hoyer.
But Leader Schumer and the White House will not follow suit. They won't condemn the harassment. They have basically endorsed it. And top Democrats are standing in the way of concrete action.
A few days ago, the Senate unanimously passed legislation to give the Supreme Court's in-house police force some additional authorities they need to do their jobs. This isn't controversial stuff. It cleared this Chamber unanimously. But House Democrats have been unwilling to promptly pass it.
Congressman Jeffries suggested yesterday this uncontroversial bill might be shunted into a lengthy committee process. Why in the world would that be done? These are essentially clerical fixes. They breezed through the Senate without objection. But House Democratic leadership wants to drag this out with hearings and markups, while mobs assemble at people's houses?
I hope this is some misunderstanding. I hope Democrats are not intentionally stalling these security measures until after the Court has issued its rulings. This would be reprehensible.
At the end of Pennsylvania Avenue, either President Biden or Attorney General Garland has apparently decided not to enforce Federal law. Like I explained on Monday, section 1507 of the Criminal Code makes it a crime right now to picket or parade with the intent of influencing a judge at locations that include a judge's residence. That is the law right now. People have been doing exactly that for days and days right now. But the Garland Justice Department is nowhere in sight.
One would think a DOJ, run by the former chief judge of the DC Circuit, would need no prodding--no prodding--to protect judicial safety and judicial independence. But at least so far, the Attorney General was quicker to pounce on concerned parents at school board meetings.
The Governors of Maryland and Virginia have had to write a joint letter to the Attorney General begging him to make his U.S. attorneys do their job and uphold the law.
So, yesterday, I sent the DOJ my own letter asking the very same question. The Senate needs answers right now, and the Court needs security right now.
