Justice Barrett has set a new judicial ethics standard — and it’s about time; The Hill, April 8, 2025

 CAROLINE CICCONE, The Hill; Justice Barrett has set a new judicial ethics standard — and it’s about time

"Unlike every other federal court, the Supreme Court operates without mandatory ethics rules. The justices alone decide if their conflicts merit recusal, with no obligation to explain their reasoning. This self-policing system creates an accountability void that would be unacceptable in any other branch of government.

However, a recent decision by a member of the court’s conservative supermajority shows us that it doesn’t have to be this way.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett bucked this trend with her recent recusal from Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond. Although Barrett provided no public explanation, it’s plausible if not likely that her decision stemmed from her close ties to Notre Dame’s Religious Liberty Clinic and personal friendship with one of the case’s legal adviser, Notre Dame law Professor and Federalist Society Director Nicole Stelle Garnett. 

This choice reflects the longstanding principle, mostly abandoned by the Roberts Supreme Court, that judges should step aside when personal relationships might bias them, or even create the appearance of impropriety."

America’s Future Is Hungary; The Atlantic, May 2025

Anne Applebaum, The Atlantic; America’s Future Is Hungary

MAGA conservatives love Viktor Orbán. But he’s left his country corrupt, stagnant, and impoverished.

"He rhapsodizes about family values, even though his government spends among the lowest amounts per capita on health care in the EU, controls access to IVF, and notoriously decided to pardon a man who covered up sexual abuse in children’s homes.

Orbán also talks a lot about “the people” while using his near-absolute power not to build Hungarian prosperity but to enrich a small group of wealthy businessmen, some of whom are members of his family. In Budapest, these oligarchs are sometimes called NER, or NER-people, or NERistan—nicknames that come from Nemzeti Együttműködés Rendszere or System of National Cooperation, the Orwellian name that Orbán gave to his political system—and they benefit directly from their proximity to the leader. Direkt36, one of the few remaining investigative-journalism teams in Hungary, recently made a documentary, The Dynasty, showing, for example, how competitions for state- and EU-funded contracts, starting in about 2010, were deliberately designed so that Elios Innovatív, an energy company co-owned by Orbán’s son-in-law István Tiborcz, would win them. The EU eventually looked into 35 contracts and found serious irregularities in many of them, as well as evidence of a conflict of interest. (In a 2018 statement, Elios said that it had followed legal regulations, which is no doubt true; the whole point of this system is that it is legal.)"

Ethics expert breaks down Trump administration’s conflicts of interest; PBS News, March 14, 2025

Laura Barrón-López, Ian Cousins, Doug Adams, PBS News ; Ethics expert breaks down Trump administration’s conflicts of interest

"It’s been less than two months since President Trump took office. In that time, Trump, his family and administration members have seen personal and financial gain in ways aided by their power and influence. This week, the president lined up Teslas at the White House to help Elon Musk as Tesla stocks plummeted. Laura Barrón-López discussed more with Don Fox."

Trump family rakes in profits as President Trump fires ethics watchdog; WBUR, February 25, 2025

 WBUR; Trump family rakes in profits as President Trump fires ethics watchdog

"The Trump family has made nearly $80 million since the election, and that's not counting the crypto assets they've been pushing. The Trump Organization, now overseen by the president's son Eric Trump, has not barred itself from pursuing deals with foreign companies, as it did during Trump’s first term. President Trump also fired the head of the Office of Government Ethics.

Wall Street Journal reporter Rebecca Ballhaus joins us to discuss the Trump family's growing fortunes.

This segment aired on February 25, 2025."

Elon Musk’s Power Grab Is Lawless, Dangerous, and—Yes—a Coup; Slate, February 4, 2025

DAHLIA LITHWICK AND MARK JOSEPH STERN, Slate;  Elon Musk’s Power Grab Is Lawless, Dangerous, and—Yes—a Coup

"The federal government is currently under relentless and unlawful assault by a man no one elected to lead it. With Donald Trump’s blessing and enabling, Elon Musk and his confederates have laid siege to the executive branch in an onslaught whose appalling and far-reaching consequences have barely begun to be reported, much less understood. Musk’s team is tearing through federal agencies at a shocking clip, gaining access to classified material, private personal information, and payment systems that distribute trillions of dollars every year, all in alleged breach of the law. The richest person in the world, who works for no recognizable government entity and answers to nobody, apparently believes he has unilateral authority to withhold duly appropriated funds, violate basic security protocols protecting state secrets, and abolish a global agency in direct contravention of Congress’ explicit command. He is reportedly leading a purge of the federal workforce, persecuting life-saving charities, and pushing outprincipled civil servants who stand in the way of his rampage."

Ethics Pledges by Trump Cabinet Draw Questions and Skepticism; The New York Times, February 1, 2025

 Eric Lipton, The New York Times; Ethics Pledges by Trump Cabinet Draw Questions and Skepticism

"A total of 467 separate conflicts that require recusal, meaning at least temporarily the official cannot handle certain matters, have been identified in 15 of these ethics letters filed so far by senior Trump administration officials or those pending confirmation, according to a tally by Campaign Legal Center.

The largest number of these recusal requirements will be imposed on Howard Lutnick, a Wall Street financier and the nominee for Commerce Department secretary, who at least initially must refrain from being involved in certain matters involving 106 different corporate entities.

To outside ethics lawyers, this is a minefield of potential problems, and reason to be apprehensive, given that during Mr. Trump’s first term, several of his cabinet members failed to honor ethics promises they made to avoid actions that benefited their families or financial interests...

Richard Painter, who served as a White House ethics lawyer during President George W. Bush’s tenure and has written a book on federal ethics policies, said that he expects that the second term of Mr. Trump will feature even less compliance with ethics rules.

“The tone of this administration is going to be a lot more confrontational to the norms of government than even the first Trump administration,” he said, pointing to the recent firing of the inspectors general and the lack of an ethics memo, like every president since Mr. Obama has issued. “It is discouraging. Very discouraging.”"

Ethics watchdog issues conflict of interest warning to Musk’s Doge agency; The Guardian, January 23, 2025

David Smith, The Guardian ; Ethics watchdog issues conflict of interest warning to Musk’s Doge agency

"A leading ethics watchdog has issued warnings to Donald Trump’s billionaire ally Elon Musk and the “department of government efficiency” (Doge), an agency Trump has stated he will create, claiming its use of encrypted messaging apps potentially violates the Federal Records Act (FRA).

American Oversight, which uses litigation to obtain public records and expose government misconduct, argues that Musk’s leadership of Doge raises “significant ethical concerns about potential conflicts of interest”, given his business empire and the substantial impact that Doge could have on federal agencies.

The warnings stem from reports that members of Doge, which aims to carry out dramatic cuts to the US government, are using the encrypted messaging app Signal with an auto-delete feature, which could hinder the preservation of official records."

Trump Begins Selling New Crypto Token, Raising Ethical Concerns; The New York Times, January 18, 2025

 Eric Lipton, The New York Times; Trump Begins Selling New Crypto Token, Raising Ethical Concerns

"President-elect Donald J. Trump and his family on Friday started selling a cryptocurrency token featuring an image of Mr. Trump drawn from the July assassination attempt, a potentially lucrative new business that ethics experts assailed as a blatant effort to cash in on the office he is about to occupy again.

Disclosed just days before his second inauguration, the venture is the latest in a series of moves by Mr. Trump that blur the line between his government role and the continued effort by his family to profit from his power and global fame. It is yet another sign that the Trump family will be much less hesitant in this second term to bend or breach traditional ethical boundaries.

Mr. Trump himself announced the launch of his new business on Friday night on his social media platform, in between announcements about filling key federal government posts. He is calling the token $Trump, selling it with the slogan, “Join the Trump Community. This is History in the Making!”...

The move by Mr. Trump and his family was immediately condemned by ethics lawyers who said they could not recall a more explicit profiteering effort by an incoming president."

“BadAss Grandmas” Pushed for an Ethics Commission. Then the North Dakota Legislature Limited Its Power.; North Dakota Monitor, ProPublica, January 6, 2025

Jacob Orledge, North Dakota Monitor, ProPublica ; “BadAss Grandmas” Pushed for an Ethics Commission. Then the North Dakota Legislature Limited Its Power.

"Fed-up North Dakotans, led by a group of women calling themselves the BadAss Grandmas, voted to amend the constitution and establish a state Ethics Commission six years ago. Their goal was to investigate and stop unethical conduct by public officials.

But the watchdog agency has achieved less than the advocates had hoped, undermined in large part by the legislature the commission is charged with overseeing, an investigation by the North Dakota Monitor and ProPublica has found."

‘This Is the Land of Wolves Now’: Two Columnists Get to the Heart of Biden’s Pardon; The New York Times, December 3, 2024

ROSS DOUTHAT AND DAVID FRENCH, The New York Times; ‘This Is the Land of Wolves Now’: Two Columnists Get to the Heart of Biden’s Pardon

"Patrick Healy, the deputy Opinion editor, hosted an online conversation with the Times Opinion columnists Ross Douthat and David French about President Biden’s decision to issue a broad pardon to his son Hunter Biden.

Patrick Healy: Ross and David, you both have written extensively about the rule of law and presidential power. You both have a good sense of what American voters care about. And you both are fathers. So I’m curious what struck you most about President Biden’s statement that he was pardoning his son Hunter Biden.

David French: As a father, I think it would be very, very hard to watch your son go to prison — especially if you have the power to set him free. I can’t imagine the pain of watching Hunter’s long battle with substance abuse and then watching his conviction in court. But in his role as president, Biden’s primary responsibility is to the country and the Constitution, not his family.

As president, this pardon represents a profound failure. Biden was dishonest — he told us that he wouldn’t pardon Hunter — and this use of the pardon power reeks of the kind of royal privilege that is antithetical to America’s republican values...

Ross Douthat: I think it’s important to stress that Biden always kept Hunter close, within the larger aura of his own power, in ways that likely helped his son trade on his dad’s name even as his own life was completely out of control. This pardon is a continuation or completion of that closeness: It’s a moral failure, as David says, a dereliction, but one that’s of a piece with the president’s larger inability to create a sustained separation between his own position and his troubled son’s lifestyle and business dealings and place in the family’s inner circle. A clearer separation would have been better not just for the president and the country, but also for Hunter himself — even if he’s benefiting from it now, at the last."

Trump transition team ethics pledge appears to exclude president-elect; CNN, November 27, 2024

 Betsy Klein, Steve Contorno and Arlette Saenz , CNN; Trump transition team ethics pledge appears to exclude president-elect

[Kip Currier: Res Ipsa Loquitur (The thing speaks for itself)]

[Excerpt]

"President-elect Donald Trump’s team submitted an ethics plan guiding the conduct of its members throughout the transition period that does not appear to include provisions for one key member of the team: the president himself.

“There does not appear to be a provision addressing the requirement for the president-elect to address his conflicts of interest,” said Valerie Smith Boyd, director of the Center for Presidential Transition at the nonprofit, nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service."

How the Trump transition ethics pledge differs from recent norms; Reuters, November 27, 2024

Heather Timmons , Reuters; How the Trump transition ethics pledge differs from recent norms

"U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's team signed an agreement on Tuesday with President Joe Biden's administration to coordinate with federal agencies and share documents, after weeks of delays.

The Trump team also posted a separate ethics pledge on the website of the General Services Administration, which echoes the standard ethics pledge signed by other past presidential candidates, ethics experts say, with some notable differences...

TRUMP'S ASSETS AND CONFLICTS

The standard pledge contains a promise that the candidate, if elected, will "avoid both actual and apparent conflicts of interest" and to "hold only non-conflicting assets, such as assets exempt from conflict by regulation."

The Trump transition team pledge contains no mention of Trump's personal ethics or assets.

It's a notable difference, said Enzo Benoit, spokesman for the Partnership for Public Service, which monitors transitions. But it may be a minor issue because Trump will be bound by the more detailed conflicts of interest requirements when he actually takes office."

"Consequences are severe": Trump's lack of ethics pledge delays transition process; Salon, November 9, 2024

Griffin Eckstein , Salon; "Consequences are severe": Trump's lack of ethics pledge delays transition process

"The specific disclosures required of Trump by the October deadline were created in the wake of his first term. A 2019 amendment to the act created the requirement after Trump sparked bipartisan outrage by failing to mitigate conflicts during his presidency. Both President Joe Biden and Harris had filed the required plans by the deadline. Biden is barred from providing Trump with necessary clearances to sit in on certain briefings until Trump has fulfilled these requirements.

Still, Trump is slated to meet in the Oval Office on Wednesday, a routine part of the transition process that Trump did not afford Biden four years ago."

Trump Holds Up Transition Process Over Ethics Code; The New York Times, November 9, 2024

 Ken Bensinger, The New York Times; Trump Holds Up Transition Process Over Ethics Code

[Kip Currier: Incipit (It begins)...]

"President-elect Donald J. Trump has not yet submitted a legally required ethics pledge stating that he will avoid conflicts of interest and other ethical concerns while in office, raising concerns that his refusal to do so will hamper the smooth transition to power.

Mr. Trump’s transition team was required to submit the ethics plan by Oct. 1, according to the Presidential Transition Act.

While the transition team’s leadership has privately drafted an ethics code and a conflict-of-interest statement governing its staff, those documents do not include language, required under the law, that explains how Mr. Trump himself will address conflicts of interest during his presidency.

Since Mr. Trump created his transition team in August, it has refused to participate in the normal handoff process, which typically begins months before the election.

It has missed multiple deadlines for signing required agreements governing the process. That has prevented Mr. Trump’s transition team from participating in national security briefings or gaining access to federal agencies to begin the complicated work of preparing to take control of the government on Jan. 20, 2025."

The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media; The Washington Post, October 28, 2024

Jeff Bezos, The Washington Post; The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media

Jeff Bezos is the owner of The Washington Post.

"I would also like to be clear that no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here. Neither campaign nor candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision. It was made entirely internally. Dave Limp, the chief executive of one of my companies, Blue Origin, met with former president Donald Trump on the day of our announcement. I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision. But the fact is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand. Even Limp didn’t know about it in advance; the meeting was scheduled quickly that morning. There is no connection between it and our decision on presidential endorsements, and any suggestion otherwise is false."

‘Anticipatory obedience’: newspapers’ refusal to endorse shines light on billionaire owners’ motives; The Guardian, October 26, 2024

Lois Beckett, The Guardian; ‘Anticipatory obedience’: newspapers’ refusal to endorse shines light on billionaire owners’ motives

"When two American billionaires blocked the newspapers they own from endorsing Kamala Harris this month, they tried to frame the decision as an act of civic responsibility.

“I think my fear is, if we chose either one, that it would just add to the division,” Patrick Soon-Shiong, the biotech billionaire who owns the Los Angeles Times, said. He emphasised that though some might assume his family is “ultra-progressive”, he is a registered “independent”.

At the Washington Post, which reported that its billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos, was behind the decision, publisher William Lewis described the retreat from making presidential endorsements as “a statement in support of our readers’ ability to make up their own minds”.

Veteran journalists and media critics are using a very different phrase to describe Soon-Shiong’s and Bezos’s choice: they’re saying the two billionaires, among the richest men on the entire globe, are performing “anticipatory obedience” to Donald Trump.

Yes, “cowardice” has also been a popular way to describe the choice by the billionaire owners of two of the country’s major newspapers to not to risk angering Trump by allowing their papers to endorse his opponent.

But “anticipatory obedience” is more specific. The term comes from On Tyranny, the bestselling guide to authoritarianism by Timothy Snyder, a historian of eastern and central Europe. The phrase describes, in Snyder’s words, “the major lesson of the Nazi takeover, and what was supposed to be one of the major lessons of the twentieth century: don’t hand over the power you have before you have to. Don’t protect yourself too early.” It’s a way of describing what Europeans did wrong as totalitarians came to power: by “mentally and physically conceding, you’re already giving over your power to the aspiring authoritarian”, Snyder explains."

Ex-WaPo Editor: This Is a Straight Bezos-Trump ‘Quid Pro Quo’; The Washington Post, October 27, 2024

 Lily Mae Lazarus , The Daily Beast; Ex-WaPo Editor: This Is a Straight Bezos-Trump ‘Quid Pro Quo’

"The Washington Post’s outgoing editor-at-large and longtime columnist has made explosive claims that its owner Jeff Bezos struck a deal with Donald Trump in order to kill the newspaper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris.

Robert Kagan, who resigned from his position on Friday after more than two decades at the publication, told the Daily Beast that Trump’s meeting with executives of Bezos’ Blue Origin space company the same day that the Amazonfounder killed a plan to support Harris was proof of the backroom deal."

Here’s what will happen to library executive who took Super Bowl tickets; Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 16, 2024

Jessica Hill,  Las Vegas Review-Journal; Here’s what will happen to library executive who took Super Bowl tickets

"For one year, Watson must comply with the ethics law and not be the subject of a complaint that a Commission on Ethics review panel finds sufficient cause to refer to the panel, Armstrong said.

He also said Watson must arrange and implement ethics law training for himself and all of the library district’s staff.

If Watson complies with the agreement and meets those requirements, the alleged violation will be dismissed, “and the library district will have a strong ethics foundation to build on going forward,” Armstrong said.

Ethics commissioner Teresa Lowry urged government employees not to accept tickets for the many sporting events offered in Las Vegas, from football to the National Finals Rodeo to Formula 1.

Lowry said Watson’s case is an outlier in that he relied on the advice of counsel, but it can serve as a cautionary tale for employees subject to Nevada ethics laws.

“It was wrong advice. It was bad advice, but our law looks at and gives mitigators to people who reasonably go to their counsel, and the safe harbor implications are then going to apply,” she said. “But just as a cautionary tale, as the events unfold for the remainder of this year and moving forward, if you are a public official, public employee, do not take tickets, accept gifts to these various sporting events.”"

Californians want controls on AI. Why did Gavin Newsom veto an AI safety bill?; The Guardian, October 16, 2024

Garrison Lovely, The Guardian; Californians want controls on AI. Why did Gavin Newsom veto an AI safety bill? 

"I’m writing a book on the economics and politics of AI and have analyzed years of nationwide polling on the topic. The findings are pretty consistent: people worry about risks from AI, favor regulations, and don’t trust companies to police themselves. Incredibly, these findings tend to hold true for both Republicans and Democrats.

So why would Newsom buck the popular bill?

Well, the bill was fiercely resisted by most of the AI industry, including Google, Meta and OpenAI. The US has let the industry self-regulate, and these companies desperately don’t want that to change – whatever sounds their leaders make to the contrary...

The top three names on the congressional letter – Zoe Lofgren, Anna Eshoo, and Ro Khanna – have collectively taken more than $4m in political contributions from the industry, accounting for nearly half of their lifetime top-20 contributors. Google was their biggest donor by far, with nearly $1m in total.

The death knell probably came from the former House speaker Nancy Pelosi, who published her own statement against the bill, citing the congressional letter and Li’s Fortune op-ed.

In 2021, reporters discovered that Lofgren’s daughter is a lawyer for Google, which prompted a watchdog to ask Pelosi to negotiate her recusal from antitrust oversight roles.

Who came to Lofgren’s defense? Eshoo and Khanna.

Three years later, Lofgren remains in these roles, which have helped her block efforts to rein in big tech – against the will of even her Silicon Valley constituents.

Pelosi’s 2023 financial disclosure shows that her husband owned between $16m and $80m in stocks and options in Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Nvidia...

Sunny Gandhi of the youth tech advocacy group Encode Justice, which co-sponsored the bill, told me: “When you tell the average person that tech giants are creating the most powerful tools in human history but resist simple measures to prevent catastrophic harm, their reaction isn’t just disbelief – it’s outrage. This isn’t just a policy disagreement; it’s a moral chasm between Silicon Valley and Main Street.”

Newsom just told us which of these he values more."