If the Supreme Court Won’t Fix Its Ethics Mess, Congress Should; The New York Times, June 12, 2023

 Erwin Chemerinsky, The New York Times; If the Supreme Court Won’t Fix Its Ethics Mess, Congress Should

"Congress should not wait on the court any longer. It has the authority to hold justices to a code of conduct. If it fails to do so, it will share responsibility for the ethics mess at the Supreme Court...

The case for the Code of Conduct for federal judges is made succinctly in its first sentence: “An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society.” That should apply equally to the nation’s highest court."

Justice Clarence Thomas delays filing financial disclosure amid increased ethics scrutiny; NBC News, June 7, 2023

 Lawrence Hurley, NBC News; Justice Clarence Thomas delays filing financial disclosure amid increased ethics scrutiny

"Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has asked for an extension in filing his annual financial disclosure report amid increased scrutiny of his ethical obligations.

Thomas, as well as fellow conservative Justice Samuel Alito, asked for a delay in filing, which is allowed under federal law, a spokesman for the judiciary said.

Other justices did submit their annual financial disclosure reports listing earnings, assets, gifts and stock holdings on time. Those reports were posted online on Wednesday."

Chief Justice Says Supreme Court Is Working to Address Ethics Questions; The New York Times, May 24, 2023

 Adam Liptak, The New York Times; Chief Justice Says Supreme Court Is Working to Address Ethics Questions

"Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said on Tuesday night that he and his colleagues on the Supreme Court were continuing to take steps to address questions about the justices’ ethical standards amid a barrage of allegations of misconduct and a push by some lawmakers to tighten the rules.

“I want to assure people that I am committed to making certain that we as a court adhere to the highest standards of conduct,” he said. “We are continuing to look at things we can do to give practical effect to that commitment, and I am confident that there are ways to do that consistent with our status as an independent branch of government and the Constitution’s separation of powers.”

Chief Justice Roberts turned down an invitation last month to testify before a Senate committee, citing the “exceedingly rare” nature of such an appearance, as lawmakers push for ethics changes at the court. A series of revelations about unreported gifts, travel and real estate deals between Justice Clarence Thomas and Harlan Crow, a Texas billionaire and Republican donor, has shaken the court, though all nine justices have defended their existing rules."

Supreme Court Justices Don’t Like Being Criticized in Public, Which Is a Good Reason to Keep Doing It; The New York Times, May 23, 2023

Stephen I. Vladeck, The New York Times ; Supreme Court Justices Don’t Like Being Criticized in Public, Which Is a Good Reason to Keep Doing It

"We will all disagree as to whether public criticism of the court in specific contexts is fair. But what can’t be denied is that public pressure on the court has been, both historically and recently, a meaningful check on the institution’s excesses — and an essential means by which the public is able to hold unelected and otherwise unaccountable judges and justices to account.

In the case of the shadow docket, it has led the court to tamp down its aggressiveness and try to provide more explanations for its less justified interventions. In the hotly debated case of ethics reform going on now, all nine justices have already publicly committed to following at least broad ethical norms. The court can go further, and it can (and should) adopt formal internal mechanisms to enforce whatever rules the justices agree to bind themselves to — much in the way that internal inspectors general hold both the executive and legislative branches to account.

The point is not that any one set of reforms is a magic bullet. Rather, it is that a court whose legitimacy depends at least to some degree on public support is not, should not be and never has been immune to criticism and pressure from the same public."

The Supreme Court ethics mess is today’s Watergate. Let’s treat it that way; The Philadelphia Inquirer, May 7, 2023

 Will Bunch,  The Philadelphia Inquirer; The Supreme Court ethics mess is today’s Watergate. Let’s treat it that way

"Democrats, or anyone else who cares about American democracy, need to turn up the knobs, considerably. For one thing, lawmakers, journalists, and the broader public need to understand that these ethical breaches aren’t coincidental, but all connected to a bigger conspiracy; the right’s determination to control the court as a check on democracy and our fundamental rights. Conservative kingmakers like Crow or the Federalist Society’s Leo want to offer like-minded justices — who make $285,400 a year — a billionaire’s lifestyle. These rainmakers want to keep Thomas and his fellow justices from either retiring or drifting leftward by enveloping them in a bubble of unthinkable opulence and personal wealth, where the only voices they hear are the pro-business prattle of the billionaire chewing on steak next to them."

Clarence Thomas Had a Child in Private School. Harlan Crow Paid the Tuition.; ProPublica, May 4, 2023

 Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski, ProPublica; Clarence Thomas Had a Child in Private School. Harlan Crow Paid the Tuition.

"“The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It’s common sense,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. “It’s all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas.”

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate’s largesse over the decades. “I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person,” Martin said.

[After this story was published, Mark Paoletta, a longtime friend of Clarence Thomas who has also served as Ginni Thomas’ lawyer, released a statement. Paoletta confirmed that Crow paid for Martin’s tuition at both Randolph-Macon Academy and Hidden Lake, saying Crow paid for one year at each. He did not give a total amount but, based on the tuition rates at the time, the two years would amount to roughly $100,000.

Paoletta said that Thomas did not have to report the payments because Martin was not his “dependent child” as defined in the disclosure law. He criticized ProPublica for reporting on this and said “the Thomases and the Crows are kind, generous, and loving people who tried to help this young man.”]"

Why Supreme Court ‘ethics’ legislation would do more harm than good; The Washington Post, April 28, 2023

Jason Willick, The Washington Post ; Why Supreme Court ‘ethics’ legislation would do more harm than good

"Lower courts have a formal process for fielding complaints of judicial misconduct, because lower-court judges can be censured or temporarily suspended from cases by panels of fellow judges. The Supreme Court is different — it does not, by definition, answer to other courts, so any code of conduct would be unenforceable within the judicial branch. Accountability at the highest levels of the executive and judicial branches must come from the political process: impeachment. By installing a permanent investigative bureaucracy to scrutinize the Supreme Court, the Senate legislation would warp constitutional lines of authority."

The US supreme court’s alleged ethics issues are worse than you probably realize; The Guardian, April 28, 2023

Moira Donegan, The Guardian; The US supreme court’s alleged ethics issues are worse than you probably realize

"Bad intent by the justices need not be present for the mere appearance of corruption to have a corrosive effect on the rule of law, and both Gorsuch and Thomas have allowed a quite severe appearance of corruption to attach itself to the court. Both have claimed that they are such intelligent and gifted legal minds that they should be given lifelong appointments of unparalleled power, and also that they have made innocent mistakes on legal forms that they are too dumb to understand.

The claim strains credulity. What it looks like, to the American people who have to live under the laws that the supreme court shapes, is that Thomas has long been living lavishly on the dime of a rightwing billionaire who wants rightwing rulings, and that Gorsuch conveniently managed to sell a house he didn’t want at the precise moment when he became important enough to be worth bribing.

The chief justice doesn’t seem very worried about this appearance of impropriety. In light of these alarming ethics concerns, Roberts’ curt rejection of the committee’s invitation to testify speaks to an evident indifference to ethical standards, or a contempt for the oversight powers of the nominally coequal branches. Ironically enough, his nonchalance has made the reality even more plain than it was before: the court will not police itself. The other branches need to show the justices their place."

Why doesn’t the Supreme Court have a formal code of ethics?; Poynter, April 17, 2023

 Matthew Crowley, Poynter; Why doesn’t the Supreme Court have a formal code of ethics?

"Enforcement questions

Steven Lubet, an emeritus law professor at Northwestern University, said enforcing any code would be challenging.

“There is no enforcement mechanism in the current … situation, in which the justices say they voluntarily follow gift disclosure and other rules,” Lubet said.

Stephen Gillers, a professor emeritus at the New York University School of Law, wondered whether the court would accept a code and whether Roberts would enforce it if the justices objected to its tenets.

“What buy-in would the court need to adopt a code that binds all justices?,” he asked. “Who would enforce it? Lower court judges whose opinions the justices review? Not likely to work. Or will the court as a whole pass on the conduct of a fellow justice? Will that be credible?”

Gillers said he doubted the recent outcry over Thomas would force the court to change.

“Six months ago, I would have rated it as very unlikely (1 in 20) that the court will adopt its own code; I think the Court would not want to be seen to react to public pressure,” he said. “Now, after the latest Thomas story, I think it is just unlikely (1 in 4/5) but increasingly possible.”"

American Bar Association Urges Ethics Code for US Supreme Court; Bloomberg Law, February 7, 2023

Lydia Wheeler, Bloomberg Law; American Bar Association Urges Ethics Code for US Supreme Court

"The American Bar Association wants the US Supreme Court to adopt a judicial ethics code.

Meeting in New Orleans on Monday, the group’s 591-member policy-making body passed a resolution urging the high court to adopt ethics rules similar to the code of conduct all other federal judges must follow.

Concern over public perception of the court seemed to prompt the ABA action. The resolution said the absence of a clearly articulated, binding code of ethics for the justices threatens the legitimacy of the court.

“If the legitimacy of the Court is diminished, the legitimacy of all our courts and our entire judicial system is imperiled,” the resolution said.

Federal judges on lower courts across the country are bound by the Code of Judicial Conduct, which maps out rules for how judges should conduct themselves on and off the bench. The code says judges should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities, refrain from political activity, and recuse themselves from a case when their impartiality might be reasonably questioned because of financial interests or personal bias."

Allegation of Supreme Court Breach Prompts Renewed Calls for Ethics Code; The New York Times, November 20, 2022

Jodi Kantor , The New York Times ; Allegation of Supreme Court Breach Prompts Renewed Calls for Ethics Code

"Lawmakers are demanding further investigation at the Supreme Court and renewing their calls for binding ethics rules for the justices, after allegations that a landmark 2014 contraception decision was prematurely disclosed through a secretive influence campaign by anti-abortion activists."

Most judges in survey support U.S. Supreme Court having ethics code; Reuters, June 22, 2022

Reuters; Most judges in survey support U.S. Supreme Court having ethics code

"Hundreds of judges nationwide believe that U.S. Supreme Court justices should be subject to an ethics code, according to a poll released Wednesday, with one saying they should set a "very high bar for the rest of us to emulate."

The National Judicial College, which provides training to judges nationally, said that in a survey of more than 12,000 of its alumni, 97% of the 859 judges who responded agreed Supreme Court justices should be bound by an ethics code."

The Supreme Court Needs an Ethics Code; The Atlantic, May 18, 2022

 Bob Bauer, The Atlantic; The Supreme Court Needs an Ethics Code

"What the leak episode showed, however, is that, without formal, published ethical rules and standards, the very nature of a problem such as the Roe leak will elude clear public explanation. The chief justice faltered in explaining the seriousness of this incident; so did a number of commentators. Justice Thomas’s public comments merely served to further muddy the picture of the state of ethics at the Court.

This has all served to illustrate the importance of an ethics code for the Court—and to underscore the urgent need for the justices to adopt one."

Supreme Court Might Get a Code of Ethics Thanks to Clarence Thomas; Newsweek, March 31, 2022

 ALEXANDRA HUTZLER , Newsweek; Supreme Court Might Get a Code of Ethics Thanks to Clarence Thomas

"Supreme Court justices are the only judges in the United States not forced to abide by a formal ethics code, but that could change as a result of the controversy surrounding Clarence Thomas.

The 74-year-old senior justice is facing calls to recuse himself from cases related to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol after text messages revealed that his wife, Virginia Thomas, expressed support for efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election."

Public’s Views of Supreme Court Turned More Negative Before News of Breyer’s Retirement; Pew Research Center, February 2, 2022

Pew Research Center ; Public’s Views of Supreme Court Turned More Negative Before News of Breyer’s Retirement

"The U.S. Supreme Court, which typically attracts only modest attention from the American public, is about to occupy the national spotlight with the possibility of a history-making change among the court’s justices and a series of highly anticipated rulings on matters ranging from abortion to gun policy.

The court enters this pivotal period with its public image as negative as it has been in many years, as Democrats – especially liberal Democrats – increasingly express unfavorable opinions of the court.

In a national survey by Pew Research Center, 54% of U.S. adults say they have a favorable opinion of the Supreme Court while 44% have an unfavorable view. The survey was conducted before Justice Stephen Breyer announced his retirement from the court and President Joe Biden reiterated his pledge to nominate the first Black woman to the Supreme Court to replace Breyer.

Over the past three years, the share of adults with a favorable view of the court has declined 15 percentage points, according to the new survey, conducted Jan. 10-17 among 5,128 adults on the Center’s American Trends Panel. Looking back further, current views of the court are among the least positive in surveys dating back nearly four decades."

Why We Need a Code of Ethics for the Supreme Court; Time, October 1, 2019

Alicia Bannon and Johanna Kalb, Time; Why We Need a Code of Ethics for the Supreme Court

"Alicia Bannon is the co-author of Supreme Court Ethics: The Need for an Ethics Code and Additional Transparency. Bannon is the managing director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program and head of its Fair Courts team.

Johanna Kalb is the co-author of Supreme Court Ethics: The Need for an Ethics Code and Additional Transparency. Kalb is a fellow at the Brennan Center and associate dean and professor at Loyola University New Orleans College of Law."

"Judges are supposed to take steps to avoid even the appearance of bias or political activity. But over the last twenty years, we’ve seen Supreme Court justices engage in activities forbidden under the code of ethics for other federal judges. Members of the Court have given partisan speeches. They have failed to recuse themselves from cases with which they have apparent conflicts of interest. Some have accepted lavish gifts from people and organizations who also fund constitutional litigation...

Of course, having a code of conduct isn’t a cure-all, whether the code applies to judges, professors, or CEOs. But it’s vital for transparency and accountability. By adopting a code of ethics that is publicly available, the Court would shape expectations among judges and the public about acceptable behavior. A code would anticipate and give guidance on knotty ethical dilemmas, and also help to protect the justices against criticism for the tricky ethical decisions they make. And if the justices slip up, a code would allow them to be held accountable, by each other, in the court of public opinion and, in very rare instances, through impeachment."

Justices Would Get Ethics Code Under New Democrat Bill; The National Law Journal, Janaury 7, 2019

Tony Mauro and Marcia Coyle, The National Law Journal; 

Justices Would Get Ethics Code Under New Democrat Bill

The bill is the latest of repeated efforts by Congress to impose an ethics code on the Supreme Court, which is exempt from the code first promulgated in 1973 by the Judicial Conference.

 

"The first bill introduced by the Democratic-led House of Representatives last week contains a provision that would include U.S. Supreme Court justices for the first time in a newly created code of conduct.

If passed, the provision could raise separation-of-powers issues and would likely irritate the high court, which covets its independence and its special status under the Constitution. The provision could also revive the controversy over ethics complaints against Justice Brett Kavanaugh that were dismissed last month because he is now on the Supreme Court, outside the purview of existing judicial ethics rules.

H.R. 1, dubbed the “For the People Act,” is a wide-ranging bill that covers issues of transparency, corruption, ethics and campaign finance reform."

Why Don’t Supreme Court Justices Have an Ethics Code?; NBC News, April 11, 2017

Rich Gardella, NBC News; 

Why Don’t Supreme Court Justices Have an Ethics Code?

""When we do a Supreme Court justice, we want to know about their background in the law and everything that they know," said U.S. Representative Louise Slaughter of New York, an 87-year-old Democrat. "Nobody ever asks them, 'Are you an honest person?'"

Slaughter has been waging a long battle to pass a bill that she says would make the justices more transparent about and accountable for conduct outside the Court.

"The one thing that we take for granted, and give them the benefit of the doubt," said Slaughter, "is that they're not going to do anything that they would not have done as a federal judge."

Slaughter has been sponsoring legislation since 2013 that would require the nation's highest Court to create and follow a code of ethics.

Her bill is called "The Supreme Court Ethics Act." Last Wednesday, she reintroduced it for the third time.

All other federal judges are subject to a published official "Code of Conduct for United States Judges," which applies to all employees of the Judicial Branch's Administrative Office of the United States Courts. The code includes specific rules about ethics, integrity and even appearances of impropriety relating to outside business and political activities and the acceptance of gifts."