The Supreme Court has adopted its first code of ethics in response to ongoing criticism over undisclosed trips and gifts received by some justices from wealthy benefactors. All nine justices agreed to the policy, which, according to an unsigned statement, does not impose significant new requirements as they claim to have already adhered to ethics standards for a long time. The purpose of the code is to dispel the misunderstanding that the justices consider themselves exempt from ethics rules, unlike other jurists in the country. However, the code relies on the justices’ self-compliance and does not establish any additional enforcement mechanisms.
The issue of ethical practices has plagued the court for several months, particularly focusing on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose financial ties with conservative donors such as Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor have also faced scrutiny. In recent months, Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh expressed support for an ethics code. Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged that the court could do more to adhere to the highest ethical standards without specifying any actions.
Gallup Poll released before the court’s new term began revealed that public trust and approval of the court are at record lows. Senator Dick Durbin, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested that the justices could address the criticism and Democratic push for an ethics code by implementing their own policy. The committee planned to subpoena Crow and conservative activist Leonard Leo to testify about their involvement in organizing and financing luxury travel for the justices. The committee, investigating the court’s ethics, passed an ethics code, but all Republicans on the panel voted against it, arguing that the Democrats were reacting to court decisions they disagreed with, such as the overturning of the nationwide right to an abortion.
The proposed ethics code aimed to increase transparency by requiring justices to provide more information about potential conflicts of interest. It also sought impartial review panels for justices’ decisions not to recuse themselves from cases and mandated written explanations for such decisions. Additionally, the code aimed to enhance transparency regarding gifts received by justices and establish a process to investigate and enforce violations related to required disclosures. However, the Democratic bill faced limited prospects of becoming law in the Republican-controlled House and the closely divided Senate.
The push for an ethics code gained momentum following investigative reports by ProPublica, which detailed the relationship between Crow and Justice Thomas. ProPublica revealed that Crow had paid for annual vacations, purchased Thomas’ Georgia home, and contributed to a relative’s private schooling for over two decades. The news outlet also reported on Alito’s fishing trip with a GOP donor, which was facilitated by Leo. Furthermore, the Associated Press disclosed Sotomayor’s book sales facilitated by her staff during college visits over the past decade.
The court’s initial response to ethics concerns earlier this year did not satisfy critics. Roberts declined the invitation to testify before the Judiciary panel but provided a “Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices” signed by all nine justices, outlining the ethical rules they follow regarding travel, gifts, and outside income. The statement promised limited additional disclosure when a justice chooses not to participate in a case, although the justices’ consistency in doing so has been questionable.
Read more about the U.S. Supreme Court’s coverage by following the AP at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
