Yesterday, a District of Columbia jury issued historic guilty verdicts against four Proud Boys members for their role in the conspiracy to stop the peaceful transfer of power on January 6. Yet this same week former President Trump’s persistent denial of the 2020 election results and his continued promotion of anti-democratic rhetoric continue to further divide the nation. As for the Supreme Court, the steady stream of press attention on possibly inappropriate gifts to, and behavior by, its justices led to a Senate hearing this week that divided along familiar partisan lines. Meanwhile, after numerous high profile controversial and punitive actions against state-level Democratic representatives in recent weeks, the growth of state-level legislative supermajorities offer increasing cause for concern.
Here’s what you need to know for the weekend:
Main Points for the Weekend:
1. The same week as the Justice Department achieves yet another milestone seditious conspiracy conviction, former President Donald Trump doubles down on election denialism and other anti-democratic rhetoric
On Thursday, a jury found four members of the Proud Boys, including its former leader Enrique Tarrio, guilty of seditious conspiracy for their role in trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power on January 6. These historic charges of what could be considered the most significant Jan. 6 trial to date follow two sets of seditious conspiracy guilty verdicts from juries against Oath Keepers, which in all have been tremendous victories for the Justice Department, accountability, and safeguarding democratic institutions. Amid this, former President Trump continues to double down on anti-democratic rhetoric, recently criticizing Fox News for settling with Dominion Voting Systems and maintaining his denial of the 2020 election results.
- Top point to make: The successful conviction of four Proud Boys members for seditious conspiracy – an extraordinarily rare and difficult to prove charge – is yet another encouraging step toward accountability for what happened on January 6 as well as bolsters ongoing criminal investigations into former President Donald Trump for his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election results. Yet we also must remain vigilant as former President Trump doubles down on election denialism and persists in defending the insurrection that took place on January 6th. As a nation, we must recognize that securing the future of our democracy necessitates learning from moments when it has been pushed to the brink. Regrettably, Trump’s unwillingness to acknowledge his role in the January 6th events and his refusal to learn from them is a hindrance to our collective progress and national healing.
- If you read one thing: Washington Post, 5/4/23: Exclusive: Behind Trump’s musical tribute to some of the most violent Jan. 6 rioters: Using physical characteristics and interviews with family members, supporters and attorneys, The Washington Post identified five of the roughly 15 men who are featured in the video. Four of them were charged with assaulting police, using weapons such as a crowbar, sticks and chemical spray, including against Officer Brian D. Sicknick, who died the next day.
2. Supreme Court ethics hearing highlights partisan rifts and mounting pressure for accountability and transparency
This week, a Senate hearing on Supreme Court ethics revealed a deep partisan divide, with some Republican senators urging the justices to address public calls for a clearer code of conduct. This comes amid a series of revelations about undisclosed gifts, luxury travel, and property deals involving the justices. These revelations culminated in two stories about activities related to Clarence Thomas on Thursday. In the first, a ProPublica report showed that Harlan Crow paid for two years of private-school tuition for Justice Clarence Thomas’s great-nephew, a gift that the justice did not disclose. In the second, documents obtained by the Washington Post revealed that conservative judicial activist Leonard Leo arranged for Thomas’s wife to be paid tens of thousands of dollars for consulting work while specifying that her name be left off billing paperwork.
Leading Democrats and advocates for court transparency have expressed frustration with the court’s refusal to establish stronger rules for reporting and addressing potential conflicts of interest, and retired conservative Judge J. Michael Luttig has called for the enactment of new ethical standards for Supreme Court justices. Despite this, all nine justices released a joint statement last week opposing proposals for independent oversight and mandatory compliance with ethics rules.
- Top point to make: A robust democracy hinges on the trust and confidence its citizens have in the judicial system, with the Supreme Court standing as the ultimate arbiter of justice in the land. It is crucial that the Supreme Court remains untainted by partisanship and corruption, transcending the divisions of Republicans and Democrats. The legitimacy of our legal system relies on the belief that no individual or institution is above the law, and that all are held accountable for their actions. Since doubts have arisen regarding the ethical behavior of the Supreme Court, it is imperative to conduct a thorough and transparent investigation. This would not only ensure the integrity of the Court but also strengthen the foundation of our democracy by reaffirming public trust in the judicial system.
- If you read one thing: New York Times, 5/2/23: Prominent Retired Judge Calls for Ethics Rules for Supreme Court Justices: A prominent conservative former federal judge joined a group of legal experts on Tuesday in calling on Congress to enact new ethical standards for Supreme Court justices, after a series of revelations about the justices’ undisclosed gifts, luxury travel and property deals. The statement by Judge J. Michael Luttig, a retired appeals court judge revered by some conservatives, was released hours before the Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Supreme Court ethics. Pressure has mounted among progressives for a stricter code of conduct for the justices, the nation’s highest judges, who are appointed to lifetime terms and are bound by few disclosure requirements.
3. State-level supermajorities amplify partisan agendas, endangering minority rights and democratic compromise
Over the past 15 years, the number of state legislative bodies controlled by one party has increased significantly, reducing the need for bipartisan collaboration. This trend has recently led to instances of legislative expulsion for dissenting Democratic lawmakers, such as in Tennessee and Montana. In both cases, representatives were penalized for challenging Republican majorities. Meanwhile, Republicans have been accused of wielding their power to suppress the voices of Black voters, such as in Mississippi. Republican lawmakers have supermajorities in at least one chamber of the state legislatures in all the former Confederate states except for Georgia, Texas, and Virginia. With these supermajorities, Republicans can pass legislation without any Democratic input.
- Top point to make: While supermajorities are a part of our democratic system, the growing prevalence of supermajority states can be attributed to gerrymandering, a tactic often employed by the majority party to redraw district boundaries in their favor. Where they exist, however, it is crucial for supermajorities to resist the temptation to adopt anti-democratic behaviors, such as punishing their opponents for lawful actions or violating established norms. For a healthy and functioning democracy, all parties must act responsibly and fairly, rather than punitively, ensuring that the voices and interests of all citizens are represented and considered.
- If you read one thing: Washington Post, 4/28/23: The rise of the state-level supermajority: Two legislators removed — however temporarily — from their positions in Tennessee. A legislator in Montana ordered to remain outside the chamber. In Missouri, a proposal that would make it easier for Republicans to amend the state constitution and harder for Democrats to do so. In states across the country, an embrace of legislation reflecting partisan dominance instead of compromise. There’s an obvious reason for this pattern. Over the past 15 years, the number of state legislative bodies dominated by one party or the other has increased dramatically. And with that increase, there’s less need to reach across the aisle.
Expert Voices
Ryan Goodman, former special counsel at the Department of Defense and Anne and Joel Ehrenkranz Professor of Law at New York University School of Law: “Important victory for accountability, for historical record, for democracy. Proud Boys conviction for seditious conspiracy to keep former President Trump in power. The white supremacist paramilitary group would not have taken these actions without Trump’s messaging.” Tweet
Renato Mariotti, former federal prosecutor: “This conviction for seditious conspiracy in the Proud Boys is important. Seditious conspiracy is a charge that is rarely brought, and this conviction speaks to the strength of the evidence and the unprecedented scheme. January 6th was a significant assault on our nation.” Tweet
Joyce Vance, former US attorney: “This “partial” verdict in the Proud Boys case is a bullseye for DOJ, with key convictions on seditious conspiracy & obstructing an official proceeding. Well done.” | “The verdicts on the obstruction of an official proceeding charge here are key. That conspiracy forms the most likely type of charge that could be brought against Trump in connection with January 6.” Tweet | Tweet
Dennis Aftergut, former federal prosecutor: “Now, juries have affirmed that on Jan. 6, 2021, two groups of such militants planned and drove the violence. Force is the central element of an insurrection, notwithstanding the attempt by Republican legislators in Tennessee and Montana to turn the term’s meaning on its head by calling Democratic members’ nonviolent protests “insurrections.” [Yesterday’s] verdicts, which include convictions for multiple other serious crimes, are sure to bolster federal prosecutors in Washington and local prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia, who are considering charges against former President Donald Trump in connection with events before and during Jan. 6.” MSNBC Op-Ed: The Proud Boys’ convictions worsen Donald Trump’s legal woes
