Washington watchdog Judicial Watch has filed a complaint with the bar association of Rhode Island for a U.S. Supreme Court filing submitted by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., while he was on inactive status.

The filing was consider by many to be a threat since it warned of a possible court-stacking campaign if the justices did not return the result the Democratic senators wanted.

Sens. Whitehouse; Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii; Richard Durbin, D-Ill.; and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.; challenged the impartiality of the sitting justices.

"From October Term 2005 through October Term 2017, this court issued 78 5-4 (or 5-3) opinions in which justices appointed by Republican presidents provided all five votes in the majority," they wrote.

TRENDING: Man arrested for alleged brutal attack on 77-year-old veteran wearing a MAGA hat

"In 73 of these 5-4 decisions, the cases concerned interests important to the big funders, corporate influencers, and political base of the Republican Party."

Now watchdog Judicial Watch says it has filed a complaint with the Rhode Island Supreme Court Clerk's Office for Whitehouse's "unauthorized practice of law."

Whitehouse filed the Supreme Court document on behalf of four clients "while maintaining inactive status as a lawyer," the complaint explains.

In addition, the watchdog charges, the brief "was unbecoming of the legal profession as it is nothing more than an attack on the federal judiciary and an open threat to the U.S. Supreme Court."

The letter explains that in addition to his "conduct unbecoming," Whitehouse "maintains inactive status" with the bar.

"As an inactive member of the Rhode Island bar, Senator Whitehouse cannot practice law in Rhode Island. However, on August 12, 2019, Senator Whitehouse did just that. He filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Besides practicing law without the proper authorization, Senator Whitehouse also violated the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct by attacking the federal judiciary and openly threatening the U.S. Supreme Court," the filing noted.

"Senator Whitehouse's assertion, without basis, that the court does not rule on the merits of cases but rather on partisan beliefs undermines confidence in the legal system. It is one thing for a politician to make such a claim on the campaign trail, it is another for a lawyer to make such a charge as part of a legal proceeding."

His actions, then, "raise substantial questions about this character and fitness to practice law," Judicial Watch said.

The complaint seeks an investigation.

The interference by the senators in the Supreme Court came in a case about another New York City gun law.

In their filing with the Supreme Court, the senators said that in the 73 cases decided by 5-4 votes, "partisan interests prevailed."

"With bare partisan majorities, the court has influenced sensitive areas like voting rights, partisan gerrymandering, dark money, union power, regulation of pollution, corporate liability, and access to federal court, particularly regarding civil rights and discrimination in the workplace."

The senators charged, "Every single time, the corporate and Republican political interests prevailed."

A short time later, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told his Democratic colleagues in the Senate to quit bullying the justices on the Supreme Court.

"They are talking about making the court more liberal," charged Graham.

BizPacReview reported Graham committed to doing "everything in my power" to prevent the liberal fantasy of packing the court with additional justices so that the decisions are more liberal.

The Democrats had threatened: "The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the court can heal itself before the public demands it be 'restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.'"