The Supreme Court announced Monday that it would adopt a formal code of conduct for the first time following months of controversy over undisclosed gifts and travel.
All nine justices signed on to the new code, which included few details about enforcement and stated many rules that the high court said were already in effect.
“The Court has long had the equivalent of common law ethics rules,” the Supreme Court said in a statement. “The absence of a Code, however, has led in recent years to the misunderstanding that the Justices of this Court, unlike all other jurists in this country, regard themselves as unrestricted by any ethics rules.”
“To dispel this misunderstanding, we are issuing this Code, which largely represents a codification of principles that we have long regarded as governing our conduct.”
The 14-page document claims that the ethics code is largely “derived from the Code of Conduct for US judges but adapted to the unique institutional setting of the Supreme Court.”
The clamor for a formal ethics code begin in April following the first of a series of reports by ProPublica detailing how Justice Clarence Thomas “accepted luxury trips virtually every year” from Dallas-based real estate guru and GOP donor Harlan Crow.
Other justices have since been subject to similar scrutiny, with Politico reporting that Neil Gorsuch sold a Colorado property for around $1.825 million to the chief executive of a major law firm nine days before his 2017 confirmation to the high court.
Clarence Thomas was under scrutiny for failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. REUTERSDemocrats led by Senate Judiciary Committee Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) have pressed for an ethics code similar to those used by lower courts.
Last week, Durbin called off a vote on two subpoenas he had been planning to send to Crow and Leonard Leo, the co-chairman of the conservative Federalist Society, who worked closely with former President Donald Trump on determining his three Supreme Court nominations.
Underpinning the Capitol Hill battle over Supreme Court ethics were constitutional concerns.
Congress is widely understood to have authority over lower courts, including on matters of ethics, but the Supreme Court is a separate branch of government.
“Congress did not create the Supreme Court,” Alito told the Wall Street Journal in a July article. “I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it. No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court – period.”
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait in 2022. APOther justices had been more publicly welcoming of ethics reforms.
In May, for instance, Chief Justice John Roberts said there was more the high court could to “adhere to the highest ethical standards,” though he didn’t elaborate at the time.
Just last month, Justice Amy Coney Barrett voiced support for some kind of ethics reform.
“I think it would be a good idea for us to do it, particularly so that we can communicate to the public exactly what it is that we’re doing — and in a clearer way than perhaps we have been able to do so far,” Barrett said at an event.
“There is unanimity among all nine justices — that we should and do hold ourselves to the highest standards, highest ethical standards possible.”
The code unveiled Monday lays out some parameters for disclosure of travel and gifts.
“Expense reimbursement should be limited to the actual or reasonably estimated costs of travel, food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the Justice and, where appropriate to the occasion, by the Justice’s spouse or relative,” it said.
The high court also hinted that it may tweak its disclosure requirements concerning those who bring cases before the justices at some point.
“In regard to financial disclosure,” it said, “the Justices will continue to seek guidance from the [Justice Department] Office of Legal Counsel and the staff of the relevant Judicial Conference committees.”
