Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. There are concerns that the professional activities of the spouse of one of our Supreme Court justices represent a conflict of interest for that justice. No, not that spouse. This time we aren’t talking about Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, Ginni Thomas, and her efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. This time we’re talking about Chief Justice John Roberts’ wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, and her work as a legal recruiter. Here, the concern is that Sullivan Roberts’ work raises ethical questions because she has placed lawyers at firms that have cases before the Supreme Court.
All but nine federal jurists in our country are subject to a series of ethical canons. And the nine who aren’t are the nine most powerful.
There are once again calls for Congress to subject the Supreme Court to a mandatory code of conduct. All but nine of the federal jurists in our country are subject to such a code, which amounts to a series of ethical canons. And the nine who aren’t are the nine most powerful we have. But not only would a mandatory code of ethics for the Supreme Court be difficult to impose, it also wouldn’t solve the main reason that confidence in the court has waned. Something is rotten at the Supreme Court. But it’s not what many seem to think it is.
First things first: When it comes to the activities of the spouses of Supreme Court justices, there is a huge gulf between seeking to undermine a valid election, as Ginni Thomas did, and placing lawyers in high-powered law firms with business before the Supreme Court, as Jane Sullivan Roberts did. It’s worth mentioning that Sullivan Roberts voluntarily stepped down from her partnership position at a law firm when the chief justice joined the Supreme Court, because of built-in concerns about the awkwardness of practicing law while her husband served on the nation’s highest court
This brings me to my main point: When people complain that…
Read the full article here
