The Supreme Court’s new code of ethics is little more than a naked attempt to gaslight our nation after a year of disturbing reports showing that the justices have been engaged in what would be considered highly unethical conduct in any other branch of government.
Chief Justice John Roberts would have Americans believe that the justices’ self-inflicted ethical problems are merely a “misunderstanding” and that the justices are now simply codifying principles that already govern their conduct. In other words: “This is fine.” But recent polls show a majority of Americans — regardless of political affiliation — disagree. It’s time to demand accountability from our country’s highest legal authority by passing the ethics code introduced by Senate Democrats.
Federal law requires justices to recuse themselves from hearing cases where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned — a mandate that the Supreme Court has blatantly ignored and is now attempting to rewrite. The law says justices “shall disqualify” themselves in such cases, but the Supreme Court’s new code of conduct only suggests justices “should disqualify” themselves.
Worse, the code is unenforceable. By giving individual justices sole power over their own recusals, it guarantees nothing will change. Compare this wildly permissive language with the stringent prohibitions on federal employees from receiving gifts from anyone who conducts “activities regulated by (their) agency” or has “interests that may be substantially affected by” their actions. Members of Congress must report to their ethics office whenever they receive a gift worth more than $250 from a close friend. Meanwhile, Supreme Court justices have left travel expenditures and land deals worth hundreds of thousands of dollars off their disclosure forms for years.
Roberts says the court has “long regarded” ethical principles. In recent years, we’ve seen billionaires host justices such as Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito on their private jets, super yachts and resorts when they stand to benefit financially from a ruling in an active case. We’ve seen justices secretly participate in fundraising events for entities that then finance amicus briefs to influence the court. We’ve even seen lawsuits stemming from entities with significant funding ties to judicial activist Leonard Leo, who, according to Washington Post reporting, secretly funneled tens of thousands of dollars to Thomas’ wife.