SCOTUS Needs To Be Subject To The Code of Conduct for United States Judges Like Other Judges

So it’s not just ethically challenged Justice Clarence Thomas. “One month after Neil M. Gorsuch was appointed to the Supreme Court in April 2017, he and two partners finally sold a vacation property they had been trying to offload for nearly two years. But when he reported the sale the next year, he left blank a field asking the identity of the buyer.”

The New York Times reports, Head of a Major Law Firm Bought Real Estate From Gorsuch:

County real estate records in Colorado show that Brian L. Duffy, the chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, a sprawling law firm that frequently has business before the court, and his wife, Kari Duffy, bought the property.

The buyer’s identity — and Justice Gorsuch’s decision not to disclose it — was reported earlier on Tuesday by Politico. Although experts said that the omission did not violate the law, they added that it underscored the need for ethics reforms given the intensifying scrutiny on financial entanglements at the Supreme Court and renewed calls by Democratic lawmakers for tightened rules.

ProPublica reported this month that Justice Clarence Thomas had not disclosed that he had repeatedly received free travel for lavish vacations and other purposes from a Republican megadonor, Harlan Crow, and that he had sold properties to Mr. Crow in Georgia.

Justice Gorsuch did not break the law by omitting the buyer’s identity, said Stephen Gillers, a New York University professor and specialist in legal ethics. Under a 1978 statute governing financial disclosures, federal judges are not required to disclose who bought property from them [a loophole].

Gabe Roth, the executive director of Fix the Court, a nonpartisan group that presses for greater transparency and accountability by the justices, agreed that the omission did not violate the law. But he argued that Congress should pass legislation expanding what justices must disclose, including losses from any sales, the nature of partnerships that hold real estate and who buyers are.

In response to an invitation from Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois who leads the Judiciary Committee, to  Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. for his testimony before Congress, on Tuesday declined to speak next week about potential ethics reforms. Chief Justice Declines to Testify Before Congress Over Ethics Concerns:

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. told the Senate Judiciary Committee in a letter released Tuesday evening that he was declining its invitation to testify about ethics rules for the Supreme Court.

In an accompanying statement on ethics practices, all nine justices, under mounting pressure for more stringent reporting requirements at the court, insisted that the existing rules around gifts, travel and other financial disclosures are sufficient.

Arrogant unaccountability.

The chief justice wrote that such appearances before the committee were “exceedingly rare, as one might expect in light of separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence.”

[In] the letter, Chief Justice Roberts attached a “statement of ethics principles and practices” signed by the current justices and included an appendix of the relevant laws that apply to judicial disclosures.

In the ethics statement, the justices wrote that they aimed to clarify how they “address certain recurring issues” and “to dispel some common misconceptions.” To deal with ethical questions, they look to “judicial opinions, treatises, scholarly articles, disciplinary decisions, and the historical practice of the court and the federal judiciary,” their signed statement said, which added that they could seek advice from colleagues and the court’s legal office.

Hmmm, what about the Code of Conduct for United States Judges?

The justices also said they may be limited in what to disclose because of security concerns.

[In] a statement, Mr. Durbin said that the hearing would proceed regardless.

“I am surprised that the chief justice’s recounting of existing legal standards of ethics suggests current law is adequate and ignores the obvious,” Mr. Durbin wrote. “It is time for Congress to accept its responsibility to establish an enforceable code of ethics for the Supreme Court, the only agency of our government without it.”

Advocates for greater transparency at the court said the statement did little to ease concerns about accountability.

“Roberts’s statement is nowhere near an appropriate response to the ethical failures of the current court,” Gabe Roth, the executive director of Fix the Court, which has called for stricter ethics rules for the Supreme Court, said in a statement.

Senators Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with Democrats, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, a centrist Republican, introduced a bipartisan bill on Wednesday aimed at forcing the Supreme Court to establish an ethics code, which would also require the court to appoint an official to examine potential conflicts and public complaints. In Bipartisan Bill, Senators Urge Supreme Court to Adopt Ethics Code:

The legislation is the latest effort by lawmakers to pressure the court to increase transparency and better police itself. It is unclear how many Republicans will back the measure. Without their support, it is unlikely to pass in a divided Congress.

Calls for an ethics code have intensified after recent reports underlined how few reporting requirements are in place and how compliance is often left to the justices themselves.

Congress has ample power to enact ethical standards to govern the non-judicial conduct of SCOTUS Justices, derived from the Necessary & Proper Cl of Art I, Sec 8, coupled with Art III, Sec 1’s vesting of the judicial power in one Supreme Court. Such a code would enhance, not…

— Laurence Tribe 🇺🇦 ⚖️ (@tribelaw) April 28, 2023

The justices say they follow the same general ethical standards that apply to other federal judges, but the lack of a binding code for the Supreme Court has been a point of contention.

[U]nder the measure, known as the Supreme Court Code of Conduct Act, the court would have to impose a code of conduct in a year, publish any rules on its website, designate an official to handle violations and publish an annual report about any complaints and actions taken.

“Americans have made clear their concerns with the transparency — or lack thereof — coming from the Supreme Court and its justices,” Ms. Murkowski said in a statement. “It is critical the public has full faith that their institutions are functioning, including the judicial branch.”

[The Grim Reaper of Democracy] Minority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, on Wednesday defended the “high ethical standards” already in place at the court. [They are about as ethical as McConnell, which is to say not at all.]

[T]he bill is the latest effort by lawmakers to hold the court more accountable. A measure introduced by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, the Rhode Island Democrat who oversees the Senate Judiciary courts subcommittee, would require the court to adopt a code of conduct that is as rigorous as the rules governing members of Congress. It would also establish clear rules dictating when justices must recuse themselves from cases because of potential conflicts.

Under legislation introduced by Senator Christopher S. Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policymaking body for the federal courts, would have to issue an ethics code that would apply to the court.

Mr. King emphasized that the measure he and Ms. Murkowski were introducing sought to hold the justices to existing standards that apply to other federal judges.

“The problem we have now is that there’s no standards,” he said. “So a justice can say, ‘Well, I didn’t violate anything here.’”