The facade of the Supreme Court of the United States in Washington. KEVIN WORM (Portal)
The United States Supreme Court announced in a statement Monday that it would release a code of conduct for its justices. The move comes after numerous scandals have called into question the integrity of several members of the court who have accepted gifts and entertainment that raise ethical questions, including possible conflicts of interest. However, the text of the Code does not contain any sanctions regime or other mechanisms to enforce compliance. It also does not introduce stricter rules on the gifts judges can receive or on transparency requirements, so beyond the gesture it represents, it is not clear what effectiveness it could have.
The new code of conduct, signed by all nine members of the Supreme Court, is only 15 pages long. Only half of this contains the regulations to be adhered to, while the presentation, signatures and a comment take up the remaining space. “The undersigned Judges promulgate this Code of Conduct to succinctly set forth and summarize in one place the ethical standards and principles that govern the conduct of the members of the Court,” the document’s introductory statement reads.
“For the most part, these rules and principles are not new: the Court has long had the equivalent of the common law ethics rules, as other members of the federal judiciary, the Opinions on Ethics and Historical Practice issued by the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Codes of Conduct explain the judges in an argument that not all experts share, since it was not clear how these rules were to be applied to them.
“However, the lack of a code has in recent years led to the misconception that the judges of this Court, unlike all other jurists in this country, do not feel constrained by any ethical standard.” To clear up this misunderstanding, we publish this Code, which is largely a codification of the principles that we have long considered to guide our conduct,” the introduction ends.
Three Supreme Court justices (Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh) have repeatedly expressed support for the development of a code of ethics in recent months. In May, Chief Justice John Roberts said the court could do more to “uphold the highest ethical standards,” without providing specific details.
The issue gained currency following a series of reports questioning the moral practices of judges. Many of the stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his lack of transparency and disclosure of travel and other financial ties to wealthy conservative donors such as Texas real estate magnate Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. In April, ProPublica revealed that the judge had taken undeclared luxury trips for years, sometimes on private planes and aboard a superyacht, paid for by Crow.
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without restrictions.
Subscribe to
Several media outlets later revealed other gifts from powerful friends that the judge had not declared. These include purchasing the mobile home that Judge Thomas uses, paying private school tuition for a great-nephew and a few real estate transactions.
Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor were also under surveillance. ProPublica reported that Judge Alito was invited on a fishing trip to Alaska with a Republican Party donor, a trip co-organized by conservative activist Leonard Leo. The Associated Press reported that Sotomayor, with the help of her team, has promoted sales of her books through visits to colleges over the past decade.
The first article of the newly enacted code reads: “A judge of the Supreme Court of the United States shall maintain and maintain high standards of conduct in order to preserve the integrity and independence of the federal judiciary.” The second sentence states: “The judge shall not permit “His family, social, political, financial or other relationships influence his official conduct or judgment.” The judge must not consciously use the prestige of his judicial functions to promote his private interests or those of others, nor must he create or allow the impression to be taken , that others feel that they are in a special position to influence him.
Several provisions refer to cases in which a judge must refrain from deciding a case. In addition, a rather lax incompatibility rule is being introduced, which prohibits judges from carrying out purely political activities, but leaves them a lot of scope for academic or even business activities: “The judge can also carry out extrajudicial activities, including those with a legal connection.” as well as civic, charitable, educational, religious, social, financial, fiduciary and governmental activities and may speak, write, lecture and teach on legal and non-legal subjects,” says the code of conduct, which introduces the following restriction: “However, a Judges shall not engage in extrajudicial activities that undermine the dignity of their office, interfere with the performance of their official duties, call into question their impartiality, lead to their frequent disqualification or violate the established restrictions.
The judges have preferred not to approve stricter rules on gifts. The Code states that judges must comply with the restrictions on accepting gifts and the prohibition on solicitation of gifts generally set forth in the Gifts Regulations of the Judicial Conference. The text states that the judge must try to prevent a family member living in his home from requesting or accepting a gift unless the rules of the Judicial Conference on Gifts allow this.
There is also no guarantee that the Code of Ethics will be more transparent from now on, as no changes have been made, although the possibility remains open to examine “the advisability” of amending some provisions on information obligations. “With respect to disclosure of financial information, judges will continue to seek the advice of the Office of Legal Counsel and the staff of relevant committees of the Judicial Conference,” comments to the code state.
Citizens’ trust and approval of the court are near historic lows, according to a Gallup poll released in late September, just before the start of the new judicial year.
Follow all international information on Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.