Ethics

The Supreme Court announced this week that it will begin using conflict-of-interest detection software to identify when justices should recuse themselves from cases. Parties filing before the Court will now be required to list stock ticker symbols in their filings to help the software flag potential conflicts. It sounds like progress. It isn’t—or at least, it isn’t nearly enough. The announcement is the latest example of the Court responding to legitimate ethics crises with the minimum possible action: a technical workaround that avoids confronting the actual problem. The actual problem is that two Supreme Court justices are still holding individual company stocks while deciding cases that affect American corporations, their shareholders, and the broader economy. ...

Conservative media is questioning whether a federal judge should recuse himself from a case because he once donated to a legal aid nonprofit. Meanwhile, Supreme Court justices have accepted millions in undisclosed gifts from billionaires with cases before the Court—and faced no consequences. The disparity reveals everything wrong with our current approach to judicial ethics. The “Scandal” That Isn’t Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz of the U.S. District Court in Minnesota is facing scrutiny for threatening to hold ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons in contempt of court. The case involves whether an Ecuadoran national detained by ICE should have received a bond hearing within seven days. ...

When Access Journalism Becomes Propaganda CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford recently declared that the Supreme Court corruption narrative is “dangerous” and “patently false”. Her defense of Justices Thomas and Alito: the Court is simply “conservative,” and criticism of its decisions doesn’t equal corruption. This is gaslighting disguised as legal analysis. ...

Two Justices, Millions in Gifts, Zero Consequences In December 2024, after 20 months of investigation, the Senate Judiciary Committee released a devastating 95-page report documenting what it called an “ethical crisis at the Supreme Court.” The findings were damning: Justice Clarence Thomas “accepted lavish gifts from billionaires with business before the court for almost his entire tenure as a justice,” with gifts of a “number, value, and extravagance” that have “no comparison in modern American history.” ...

The Only Court in America Without Enforceable Ethics Rules Here’s a fact that should shock every American: The Supreme Court’s nine justices are the only federal judicial officers who are not subject to a specific and binding code of ethics. Every other federal judge in America—from district courts to circuit courts of appeals—faces enforceable ethical rules and potential discipline for violations. All fifty state supreme courts subject their justices to ethics reviews with real consequences. ...

The United States Is Alone When defenders of the Supreme Court’s current structure argue that reform would be “radical” or “unprecedented,” they’re counting on Americans not knowing how other democracies structure their highest courts. The truth? The United States is a global outlier—and not in a good way. Among major democracies, the United States is alone in providing life tenure for members of its highest court. Alone in having no mandatory retirement age. Alone in having no enforceable ethics code with real consequences. ...

A Justice Who Believes He’s Above Accountability Justice Samuel Alito presents himself as a principled originalist who respects precedent and follows the highest ethical standards. The reality is starkly different. Alito accepted luxury trips worth over $100,000 from a billionaire who later had cases before the Court—and didn’t disclose them. He flew insurrection flags at his homes and refused to recuse from January 6 cases. He told a Senator during confirmation hearings that precedent was “settled,” then systematically dismantled 50 years of abortion rights. He secretly recorded telling an activist that America must “return to a place of godliness.” ...

A Supreme Court Justice for Sale For over 20 years, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas accepted luxury gifts from billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow valued at more than $4.75 million. Private jet trips across the globe. Lavish yacht vacations. A quarter-million-dollar RV he never fully paid for. Private school tuition for a family member. Real estate deals. And he disclosed almost none of it. ...

When Words Ring Hollow Chief Justice John Roberts released his annual year-end report on the federal judiciary, and it’s a remarkable document—not for what it says, but for what it so carefully avoids saying. Roberts chose to focus on Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” and the Declaration of Independence, waxing eloquent about America’s founding principles and the judiciary’s sacred duty to decide cases “faithfully and impartially.” It’s a beautiful sentiment. It’s also utterly disconnected from the reality of the Supreme Court he leads. ...