Judiciary Committee

both house and senate have one 

see house node

scotus ethics reform?

===

11 26

Key Senate Committees and Their Likely Leaders

Here are the most likely committee leaders, and the races to watch in the Senate:

Senate Judiciary Committee

The Judiciary Committee has broad legislative jurisdiction and is the Senate’s main forum for public debate on social and constitutional issues, as well as oversight of the Department of Justice and the courts. It oversees key activities of the executive branch and handles the first stage of confirming all federal judicial nominees.

Chair: Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) is planning to succeed retiring Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL). He has met with anticipated House Judiciary Chair, Rep. Jamie Raskin, in the months leading up to the midterm and has said the Supreme Court justices would be the first targets of their joint effort, with aggressive investigations and a stack of subpoenas already being prepared. He is known for his climate advocacy, “dark money” in elections, judicial ethics, and outside influence on the judiciary. Priorities will include DOJ and FBI oversight, immigration, antitrust and Big Tech/AI, and judicial ethics.

Ranking Member: Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) may be the top Republican on the committee. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is term-limited, and other senior GOP members will not be in the next Congress. Senator Lee would have to give up his Energy and Natural Resources spot to take on Judiciary, but has said being the top Republican on Judiciary would be “hard to turn down.” Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is next in seniority after Lee but will remain a top Commerce Republican. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) would be next in seniority but has not been reported as seeking the top Republican spot on Judiciary.

-=-=

521 MARKEY

"We finally have a Senator who has committed to introduce the #WeThePeopleAmendment in the Senate. But there's a caveat: he is asking us to bring at least 5 other Senators on board, and specifically, to get one or more that serve in the Judiciary Committee.

------

senate leo

rs

In November, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to authorize a subpoena after Leo refused to provide lawmakers with a full accounting of all gifts and payments that he has directed to Supreme Court justices and their spouses. The vote followed reports that Leo steered secret consulting payments to Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, and arranged Justice Samuel Alito’s seat on a private jet — paid for by a billionaire hedge-fund chief — as part of an undisclosed luxury fishing trip in Alaska in 2008.

---

an 12 24

no lnx

alternet-

'Pit bulls of retribution': Swalwell braces for Trump admin after 'gross abuse'

Matt Laslo,Alexandria Jacobson and Raw StoryDecember 11, 2024

A new watchdog report released Tuesday revealed that the Department of Justice under the first Donald Trump administration secretly obtained phone records for members of Congress, journalists, government staffers and incoming FBI director nominee Kash Patel — actions the top House Judiciary Democrat exclusively told Raw Story are a "gross abuse" of power worthy of investigation.

Two Democratic members of Congress. then-Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (R-CA), were targeted in the report, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN.

"My suspicion alert level is at the highest, considering it was me and another Democrat who the president, President Trump would routinely call out all the time, either in his tweets or his public statements," Swalwell told Raw Story on Tuesday. "That's what he was willing to do in his first administration, where there were guardrails in place and serious [pushback] around him. It's very concerning as to what he'll be willing to do with unserious people around him who are seeking to be pit bulls of retribution."

Swalwell said targeting Congress members and staff is "incredibly concerning" and will be more so with the incoming administration of Trump loyalists as "any guardrails that were in place last time are gone now with this new team," he said.

ALSO READ: Trump allies promise revenge as Dems ram through Biden judges

"Once you start going after like individual members who are critical of the president, you better be damn sure you have the goods, and it was clear that Schiff and I had done nothing wrong, and it was just a way to try and find something on us, to indict or embarrass us," Swalwell said.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), the current top Democratic ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, exclusively told Raw Story that the Department of Justice investigation intended to have a "chilling effect."

"It's a gross abuse and ought to be investigated, although with Trump coming in, he's not gonna investigate it," said Nadler, who announced he would drop out of the Democratic House Judiciary race and endorsed Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD).

Schiff, who was sworn into the Senate on Monday, joined current Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for a press briefing on Tuesday. He said that pre-emptive pardons were not necessary for himself or other members of the January 6 committee, but he did not take questions from reporters about the report.

NOW READ: Trump is taking the mask off after lying to us for more than a year

521

CHAIR:  Dick DurbinD-IL

Majority

Patrick Leahy Senator Patrick Leahy D-VT [kid infleuncer conserv?]

 Dianne FeinsteinSenator Dianne FeinsteinD-CA

Sheldon WhitehouseSenator Sheldon WhitehouseD-RI

Amy Klobuchar Senator Amy KlobucharD-MN

Christopher A. Coons Senator Christopher A. CoonsD-DE

Richard Blumenthal Senator Richard BlumenthalD-CT

Mazie Hirono Senator Mazie HironoD-HI

Cory Booker Senator Cory BookerD-NJ

 Alex Padilla Senator Alex Padilla D-CA

Jon OssoffSenator Jon Ossoff D-GA

Chuck GrassleyRanking MemberR-IA

Minority

Lindsey GrahamLindsey GrahamR-SC

John CornynSenator John CornynR-TX

Michael S. LeeSenator Michael S. LeeR-UT

Ted CruzSenator Ted CruzR-TX

Ben SasseSenator Ben SasseR-NE

Joshua D. HawleySenator Joshua D. HawleyR-MO

Tom CottonSenator Tom CottonR-AR

John KennedySenator John KennedyR-LA

Thom TillisSenator Thom TillisR-NC

Marsha BlackburnSenator Marsha BlackburnR-TN

---

an 11 23

the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved subpoenas for conservative billionaire Harlan Crow and the Federalist Society's Leonard Leo despite loud objections from the committee's Republican members.

Axios reported that during the roll call for the subpoenas, Republicans repeatedly "shouted objections." Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) was quoted yelling "come on, man" as chairman Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) conducted the vote. Punchbowl News reporter Heather Caygle tweeted that Republicans then "left the room during the vote."

The chaos started after Durbin moved to suspend rule IV, which allows for debate, in order to move directly to the subpoena vote. Republicans were upset, claiming debate over the confirmation of judicial nominees was being prematurely stifled. Durbin responded that the committee had already debated the nominees "at great length" during a prior hearing before moving ahead with the rule IV motion.

"You're going to have a lot of consequences coming if you go down this road," Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) told the committee. "Listen to me, I've cautioned a lot of you."

"So you're telling us to shut up? You want us to shut up? That's what you're saying," Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee) said to Durbin.

Even though the uproar in the committee was ostensibly over the process of debating judicial nominees, a Senate Republican aide speaking anonymously to Axios told the publication that senators' anger was more in relation to the subpoenas of Crow and Leo.

:{:{The Senate Judiciary Committee ordered the subpoenas for both Harlan Crow and Leonard Leo in relation to Crow's numerous undisclosed gifts to Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and Leo's facilitation of those gifts. Currently, all federal judges — including members of the Supreme Court – are banned from receiving gifts and compensation for speeches and public appearances under the Ethics Reform Act of 1989.}:

READ MORE:Ex-judge: Clarence Thomas RV loan another example of justice 'doing an end run' around ethics rules

"Leo’s efforts to keep Thomas happy meant 38 destination vacations, a voyage on a yacht around the Bahamas, 26 private jet flights (plus eight by helicopter), a dozen VIP passes to professional and college sporting events (typically sitting in a box), two stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica, and a standing invitation to an exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic coast," Gertner wrote. "Most of these were arranged by Leo and paid for by conservative billionaires."

---

520

THIS WEEK, Mitch McConnell is bringing theSenate back in session ... no, it's not to pass emergency coronavirus relief ... it's to ram through the confirmation of some of Trump's most unfit judicial nominees yet!

Justin Walker -- a Brett Kavanaugh protégé who not only is a right-wing extremist, but also severely lacks experience and has been rated "not qualified" by the American Bar Association (ABA)-- will be considered by theJudiciary Committeein a matter of days for his nomination to the powerful DC Circuit Court of Appeals. ALL senators need to know that Americans are paying attention and we REJECT Trump and McConnell's efforts to rubber-stamp unfit judges, especially during the current crisis.

==

==

https://lawandcrime.com/judiciary/senate-dems-investigating-former-federalist-society-leaders-influence-over-trump-admins-judicial-nominees/

Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats are seeking information on the role former Federalist Society leader Leonard Leo played in in choosing the jurists President Donald Trump has nominated to lifetime appointments as federal judges. In letters sent to Attorney General William Barr and White House counsel Pat Cipollone on Wednesday, the senators said they were specifically looking into the potential conflicts of interest presented by Leo’s advising the president on judicial selections while leading a group that is anonymously funded, “likely from entities that have interests before the federal courts.”

“Mr. Leo’s prominent role in the Trump Administration’s judicial selection and nominations process while maintaining a financial interest in advocacy efforts related to this process has raised questions regarding his potential status as a federal employee and compliance with accompanying laws and regulations,” the letter to Barr stated.

The senators emphasized that by advising the Trump administration on its selection of federal judges, Leo’s conduct raised significant questions as to whether he was performing the duties of a federal government employee without proper authority, thereby violating federal ethics law.

“By outward appearances, Mr. Leo may have engaged in the performance of a federal function that must be conducted by government employees authorized to act on behalf of the United States by leading the Administration’s efforts to identify and select judicial nominees, and press for their confirmation,” they wrote. “As a federal employee, Mr. Leo would have been responsible for complying with federal records retention and financial disclosure requirements, as well as the criminal financial conflict of interest statute.”

Led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the Democratic senators who signed the letters were attempting to shed light on the process that has allowed the Trump White House and GOP-led Senate to confirm an unprecedented number of judges (nearly 200) in just over three years.

The senators assert that knowing the specifics of Leo’s involvement in the selection process is vital to ensuring the process remains untainted.

“Mr. Leo’s personal financial interest in advocacy efforts related to the judicial selection and nominations process raises serious concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest and the independence of the federal judiciary, given Mr. Leo’s leadership role in the Trump Administration’s work on the issue,” they wrote, before listing a number of questions relating to Leo’s role in the selection process.

As previously reported by Law&Crime, Leo stepped away from the Federalist Society earlier this year to helm a massive effort aimed at securing Trump’s re-election by highlighting the 45th president’s record on appointing conservative judges.

See below for the full letter sent to AG Barr:

 ===

omg ct packing #1 guy

One of Trump’s worst judicial nominees yet, Steven Menashi, was just voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a straight party-line vote.

What’s worse,Judiciary Committee Chair– and infamous Trump lackey – Lindsey Graham rammed Menashi through committee right on the heels of a New York Times report that, when he was serving as Sec. Betsy DeVos’s right-hand man at the Dept. of Education, Menashi helped construct an elaborate and ILLEGAL scheme to deny debt relief for thousands of students swindled by a for-profit college!

==

===

 Senate’s Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights Subcommittee

---

:{sj 19::{The Democrats on the US Senate Committee On The Judiciary spoke }:

unanimously yesterday, passing a resolution for a constitutional 

amendment to correct most of the damage done by the Citizens United, 

and other related rogue recent Supreme Court decisions. 7/14  on to house?}:

:{

Here’s what will become the 28th Amendment:}:

:{To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.

Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections.

Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.}:

:{Public Citizen worked very closely with key senators on that simple yet powerful language.

And at 3:49 p.m. Eastern time yesterday, the amendment was formally adopted by the Senate’s Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights Subcommittee.

Of course, there is an awful lot of work yet to do.

The amendment now moves to the Senate Judiciary Committee. That’s scheduled for July 10.

And then it goes to the full Senate, either later in July, or after the August congressional recess.}:

===

12/15

Overcriminalization vs. Mass Incarceration

Although civil rights activists have been focused on mass incarceration—such as changing the mandatory minimum sentences enacted during the drug war that have disproportionately affected people of color, policies that scholars like Michelle Alexander have described as a "new Jim Crow"—the Kochs, ALEC, and other Koch-backed groups have been largely discussing overcriminalization.

Despite how it sounds, "overcriminalization" isn't focused on the disproportionate rate of incarceration of people of color. It is instead focused on the idea that there are too many crimes—and, more specifically, too many white-collar crimes that might affect corporate interests.

"All of the attention here is on whether this will only benefit quote-unquote white-collar criminals, people at financial institutions, people at firms that are damaging the environment," Jeffery Robinson, deputy legal director of the ACLU, said about the Sensenbrenner bill.

"If it only benefits those people, then I haven't seen any evidence that there is any over-incarceration among that group. In fact, we see very few prosecutions of such individuals."

That is, corporations and their leaders are not often federally prosecuted and convicted. In fact, many Americans have expressed deep disappointment that more corporations and bankers were not prosecuted following the gambling on Wall Street that led to the economic crash in 2008, unlike the nearly 1,000 prosecutions following the Savings & Loan crisis in the late 1980s.

"To a considerable extent, deferred prosecutions—in which the Justice Department agrees not to prosecute in exchange for a promise by corporate defendants not to violate the law in the future—have replaced actual prosecutions, undermining any kind of deterrent effect" for criminal penalties, Public Citizen's Weissman added. Deferred prosecutions are almost unheard of outside of the white collar crime context.

Some have expressed general concern that there are too many federal offenses with criminal penalties and too many that don't specify an intent standard, an issue that is being studied in the Senate bill. However, Koch-backed groups have been strongly focused on white-collar crimes, and their "solution"—the blanket imposition of a strict intent standard on every federal crime, as opposed to less-stringent "negligence" or "recklessness" standards—would undermine the few corporate criminal prosecutions that do take place.

For example, the U.S. Department of Justice has noted that—if the Sensenbrenner bill had been law—it could not have secured a guilty plea in last year's case against Jensen Farms, whose failure to follow food safety standards with its cantaloupe led to a listeria outbreak that killed 33 people. Imposing a default intent requirement could affect prosecutions for violations of laws like the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Resource Recovery and Compensation Act (RCRA), and many others.

And such changes could also make it harder to prosecute Koch Industries.

As *Forbes* noted, in 2000, "A federal grand jury indicted the privately held company and four of its employees in September on 97 related charges for alleged violations that took place at the company's refinery in Corpus Christi, Tex." Koch Industries was facing "criminal charges, in which the petroleum giant is accused of spewing the toxic chemical benzene into the environment in 1995 and then trying to hide it from government investigators."

Koch and its employees may not have intended to "leak" 91 metric tons of toxic benzene into the air and water around their refinery but their failure to install key protections and fully monitor their emissions resulted in their refinery loading 15 times the legal limit of the toxic substance into the environment.

That is, Koch Industries exposed nearby residents to massive amounts of benzene, which "is a well-established cause of cancer in humans." It is a "group 1" carcinogen because studies have documented that it causes acute myeloid leukemia in humans, and it may also cause lymphocytic leukemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. It can also result in reduced production of bone marrow and suppress T-cells, which makes people more vulnerable to infections. It has also been found to lead to chromosomal aberrations and can reduce birth weight and cause other health problems.

But then George W. Bush became president and John Ashcroft was named Attorney General. In the 2000 election, David Koch was one of the top 30 donors to Bush and the Republican party in the U.S., contributing $378,500 directly and an untold sum through soft money operations resembling the Triad group that was tied to the Kochs following a Senate investigation, as the Center for Media and Democracy has documented.

The Bush administration reduced the charges, which could have led to fines of more than $500 million, and dropped the case to just one count for a Koch Industries subsidiary, Koch Petroleum Group. "Under the plea agreement, Koch will pay a total of $20 million dollars: $10 million in criminal fines and $10 million for special projects to improve the environment in Corpus Christi—a record amount imposed in an environmental prosecution," the DOJ stated.

It is this experience—the massive emission of a known carcinogen—that the Kochs say sparked their interest in criminal justice reform. Over the years, Koch Industries has been investigated for numerous potential violations of federal and state law. And the Koch reform efforts could help prevent such prosecutions from ever occurring again.

"Overcriminalization: Liberty, and More, At Risk for Corporations and Their Employees"

At times, the Kochs have been clear about the connection between "overcriminalization," a mens reaintent requirement, and their corporate interests.

In September of 2011, for example, Koch Industries' Associate General Counsel, Marsha Rabiteau, gave a presentation titled "Overcriminalization: Liberty, and More, At Risk for Corporations and Their Employees." She had given a nearly identical presentation two years earlier, titled then "Mens rea and other Criminal Law Fundamentals on the Tines of the Public Pitchfork."

That presentation, to a meeting of the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, warned that:

"The life of the corporation, the liberty interests of corporate officers and other employees can be in the cross-hairs of criminal prosecution over matters that often do not rise to true criminal activity."

The solution to the "overcriminalization" problem, Rabiteau said, was to create a default mens rearequirement, as would later appear in the Sensenbrenner bill and in ALEC model legislation.

Rabiteau suggested that attendees visit the Koch-backed Heritage Foundation's "Overcriminalization" project (at overcriminalized.com) and cited a report from Heritage and another Koch-backed group, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, called "Without Intent: How Congress Is Eroding the Criminal Intent Requirement in Federal Law."

(Rabiteau also suggested that corporations, as a legal fiction, could not form the requisite "intent" to be held liable for a criminal act—although corporations and Koch groups have supported the creation of a right to corporate "free speech" in the form of spending unlimited amounts in elections.)

The Koch Associate General Counsel argued that reforming corporate criminal justice law is needed "so that wrongdoers are punished with laws that are clear and adhere to our Anglo-American heritage."

Although Rabiteau was likely referring to the country's "legal heritage," an appeal to "our Anglo-American heritage" to protect white collar criminals from criminal prosecution—when the burdens of an unjust criminal justice system have largely fallen on non-Anglo-Americans—further indicates the divide between the corporate criminal justice crusaders and civil rights-oriented reformers.

Moreover, America's legal heritage viewed corporate power with deep skepticism and for many years required that corporations have limited charters and durations to prevent them from misuse.

Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Compromise, "Without Intent"

The Koch funding for criminal justice reform efforts ramped-up as the federal government began taking steps to reign in financial institutions following the collapse of Wall Street.

As the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill was being debated in 2010, two Koch-backed groups, the National Association for Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Heritage Foundation issued a comprehensive joint report and project called "Without Intent" criticizing "overcriminalization" and the lack of intent requirements in the federal criminal code.

The co-author of NACDL's "Without Intent" report, which has been repeatedly cited in Congress' debate on criminal justice reform, is Tiffany Joslin, who is now Deputy Chief Counsel for the House Judiciary Crime Subcommittee, which is chaired by Rep. Sensenbrenner.

NACDL urged Congress to strike criminal provisions of Dodd-Frank that did not include an intent requirement, but Congress rejected that lobbying. When the law passed later that year, NACDL criticized the bill on these grounds:

"the overwhelming majority of the criminal offenses contained in the bill lack adequate mens rea, or criminal intent, requirements and, consequently, will fail to protect innocent or inadvertent actors from being criminally prosecuted or punished."

Why would the Kochs be concerned about Dodd-Frank and financial regulation? Because a big part of their multi-billion-dollar business comes from oil speculation. The Kochs have long been deeply involved in global financial markets, especially energy and commodity trading.

- See more at: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2015/12/13002/koch-criminal-justice-reform-trojan-horse#sthash.qFGXGqkw.dpuf

==

House subcom has jurisd on voter id

watched o'keefe vid on holder

The Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: constitutional amendments, constitutional rights, Federal civil rights, ethics in government, tort liability, including medical malpractice and product liability, legal reform generally, other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and relevant oversight.

The Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: constitutional amendments, constitutional rights, Federal civil rights, ethics in government, tort liability, including medical malpractice and product liability, legal reform generally, other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and relevant oversight.

Rep. Trent Franks, Chairman; Rep. Jim Jordan, Vice-Chairman

http://judiciary.senate.gov/

majority of members FS

The Federalist Society’s close ties with the Senate Judiciary Committee represents its awareness of the key role federal court judges and the Supreme Court justices play in shaping the law. There are more than 19 federal court justices who are members. Of the nine Supreme Court Justices, five are Federalist members or have strong ties to the society. Justice Scalia was a faculty advisor to the Federalists when he was at the University of Chicago, Justice Alito and Justice Thomas are members who lend their time to speak at society events, Justice Kennedy favors clerk applicants with membership on the resume, and although Chief Justice Roberts claims to never have been a member, documents that surfaced during his confirmation hearings indicated that at one time he served on its steering committee.

113th

• Bob Goodlatte, Virginia, Chairman (113th)
• Jim Sensenbrenner, Wisconsin
• Howard Coble, North Carolina
• Lamar S. Smith, Texas, former Chairman (112th)
• Steve Chabot, Ohio
• Spencer Bachus of Alabama ^[1]
• Darrell Issa, California
• Randy Forbes, Virginia
• Steve King, Iowa
• Trent Franks, Arizona
• Louie Gohmert, Texas
• Jim Jordan, Ohio
• Ted Poe, Texas
• Jason Chaffetz, Utah
• Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
• Trey Gowdy, South Carolina
• Mark Amodei, Nevada
• Raúl Labrador, Idaho
• Blake Farenthold, Texas
• George Holding, North Carolina
• Doug Collins, Georgia
• Ron DeSantis, Florida
• Keith Rothfus, Pennsylvania
• Jason T. Smith, Missouri

The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights is one of six subcommittees within the Senate Judiciary Committee. The subcommittee was best known in the 1970s as the committee of :{Sam Ervin:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}:, whose investigations and lobbying — together with :{Frank Church:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}: and the :{Church Commission:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}: — led to the founding of the :{Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}:.

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1 Jurisdiction
• 2 Members, 113th Congress
• 3 See also
• 4 External links

Jurisdiction

From the Senate Judiciary Committee website:

• (1) Amendments to the United States Constitution
• (2) Civil rights oversight
• (3) Property rights
• (4) Federal-state relations
• (5) Individual rights
• (6) Commemorative Congressional Resolutions
• (7) Interstate compacts

Members, 113th Congress

See also

• United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution

used okeefe video as evidence of voter fraud?

The Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice is one of five subcommittees of the United States**:{House:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}:**:{ Committee on the Judiciary:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}:.

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1 Jurisdiction
• 2 Members, 113th Congress
• 3 See also
• 4 References
• 5 External links

Jurisdiction:{:(style="margin-left:-0.25em;margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit source | edit:{beta:(style="vertical-align:top;padding-left:0.5em;display:inline !important;background-image:none !important"):}::{]}:

The Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: constitutional amendments, constitutional rights, Federal civil rights, ethics in government, tort liability, including medical malpractice and product liability, legal reform generally, other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and relevant oversight.

Members, 113th Congress:{:(style="margin-left:-0.25em;margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit source | edit:{beta:(style="vertical-align:top;padding-left:0.5em;display:inline !important;background-image:none !important"):}::{]}:

See also:{:(style="margin-left:-0.25em;margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit source | edit:{beta:(style="vertical-align:top;padding-left:0.5em;display:inline !important;background-image:none !important"):}::{]}:

• United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights