Perhaps Supreme Court Justices are not above the law after all? Tremendous news to report as Stephen Miller’s America First Legal group has just filed a lawsuits against Chief Justice John Roberts! Stephen Miller’s America First Legal has filed a lawsuit against Chief Justice John Roberts. Its beginning. pic.twitter.com/wFAYQqq3de — X22 Report (@X22Report) May 6, 2025 Here is a quick summary of what’s going on, and then we’ll jump in and go deeper: Stephen Miller’s America First Legal Foundation (AFL) has initiated a lawsuit against Chief Justice John Roberts and Robert J. Conrad, Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The case, filed on April 22, 2025, is presided over by Judge Trevor N. McFadden, a Trump appointee. Overview of the Lawsuit: FOIA Requests: AFL submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests seeking communications between the Judicial Conference, the Administrative Office, and Democratic lawmakers, specifically Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative Hank Johnson. These lawmakers have been involved in inquiries concerning ethical conduct of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Denial of Requests: The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office denied these FOIA requests, asserting that they are part of the judicial branch and thus exempt from FOIA, which applies to executive agencies. Legal Argument: AFL contends that the Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office perform functions characteristic of executive agencies, such as policy-making and administrative tasks, and should therefore be subject to FOIA and presidential oversight. They argue that these bodies are not courts per se and thus fall outside the judiciary’s exemption from FOIA. Potential Implications: If AFL’s lawsuit succeeds, it could redefine the boundaries between the executive and judicial branches, potentially allowing the executive branch greater control over entities traditionally considered part of the judiciary. Legal experts have expressed skepticism about the lawsuit’s merits, viewing it as a challenge to judicial independence and an attempt to expand executive power.  Current Status: The case is currently under review in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Given the constitutional questions involved, it may progress through the appellate system, potentially reaching the Supreme Court. Now let’s get into more details…. Here is AFL making the official announcement: “A pro-Trump legal group founded by White House aide Stephen Miller is suing Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts… The lawsuit was filed by America First Legal.” pic.twitter.com/33QjS9j5xO — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) May 6, 2025 Fox News had more details: The complaint accuses both the U.S. Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts of performing certain regulatory actions that go beyond the scope of resolving cases or controversies, or administratively supporting those actions, which they argue are the “core functions” of the judiciary. It also argues that records held by the Roberts-led U.S. Judicial Conference should therefore be subject to the Freedom of Information Act requests, or FOIA requests, as a result. AFL cited in its lawsuit recent actions taken by both the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office in 2023 to “accommodate” requests from Congress to investigate allegations of ethical improprieties by Justices Thomas and Alito, and subsequently to create or adopt an “ethics code” for justices on the high court. “Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch,” AFL said, adding: “The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies,” and must therefore be overseen by the president, not the courts. The U.S. Judicial Conference is the national policymaking body for the courts. It is overseen by the Supreme Court’s chief justice, and tasked with making twice-yearly recommendations to Congress as needed. The Administrative Office for the U.S. Courts, meanwhile, operates under the guidance and supervision of the Judicial Conference. Its role is to provide administrative support to the federal courts on certain administrative issues and for day-to-day logistics, including setting budgets and organizing data, among other things. Plaintiffs for AFL, led by attorney Will Scolinos, argued in their lawsuit that the Judicial Conference’s duties are “executive functions,” and functions they allege must be supervised by executive officers “who are appointed and accountable to other executive officers.” Further, AFL argued, “Courts definitively do not create agencies to exercise functions beyond resolving cases or controversies or administratively supporting those functions.” In their view, this is also sufficient to put the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts — as it is overseen by the Judicial Conference — under the executive branch as well.