In the wake of multiple recent ethics issues involving Supreme Court justices, many people have called for a new “ethics code” for the Supreme Court. The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding a hearing on a new “code of conduct” Tuesday, and several lawmakers have advanced bills proposing such a code. But the Supreme Court already has an ethics code. What’s lacking is a way to enforce it, a way to hold justices accountable when they violate the law. The court’s system of self-regulation has broken beyond repair and must be replaced with a new system of supervision.
The Supreme Court’s rules on ethics can be found in the U.S. Code, federal statutes that require both annual financial disclosure reports from all federal judges and recusals from cases in which justices’ impartiality can reasonably be questioned. Let’s start with the financial disclosure rules, imposed on all three branches of the federal government since the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 was passed after Watergate. The underlying concept is simple: If you hold a high-ranking government position, the public has the right to know what investments you and your spouse have, where your income is coming from and who is giving you gifts, whether in physical form or as free trips and lodging from millionaires and billionaires.
Even though these rules seem straightforward, justices have struggled to comply.
These disclosures are important. Some Supreme Court spouses make a lot of money, sometimes from people interested in cases before the court. Similarly, gifts from “personal friends” are allowed but must be disclosed. And yes, some of these friends have yachts and private planes to fly around their friends who happen to be Supreme Court justices. Ideally these gifts should be refused, but under the Ethics and Government Act at a minimum they must be disclosed. There is an exception for “personal hospitality,” but that exception is expressly limited to food, overnight lodging in…
Read the full article here