The Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

[Magnus]

The Supreme Court is adopting its first code of ethics, in the face of sustained criticism over undisclosed trips and gifts from wealthy benefactors to some justices.

The policy was issued by the court Monday. The justices, who have hinted at internal deliberations over an ethics code, last met Thursday in their private conference room at the court.

The issue has vexed the court for several months, over a series of stories questioning the ethical practices of the justices. Many of those stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. But Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor also have been under scrutiny.

The statement provided by Roberts said that the nine justices “reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The statement promised at least some small additional disclosure when one or more among them opts not to take part in a case. But the justices have been inconsistent in doing so since.

The Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

---

About damn time. Now, let's see if they proactively implement it. I know they won't but one can only hope.

 

[okfine]

The Supreme Court is adopting its first code of ethics, in the face of sustained criticism over undisclosed trips and gifts from wealthy benefactors to some justices.

The policy was issued by the court Monday. The justices, who have hinted at internal deliberations over an ethics code, last met Thursday in their private conference room at the court.

The issue has vexed the court for several months, over a series of stories questioning the ethical practices of the justices. Many of those stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. But Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor also have been under scrutiny.

The statement provided by Roberts said that the nine justices “reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The statement promised at least some small additional disclosure when one or more among them opts not to take part in a case. But the justices have been inconsistent in doing so since.

The Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

---

About damn time. Now, let's see if they proactively implement it. I know they won't but one can only hope.

I can imagine what their own ethics entail.

 

[Meister]

They might start with using 'Blind Justice' instead of using their politics.

 

[BackAgain]

This isn’t even a tempest in a teapot. It’s more like a quick light drizzle in a rainforest.

 

[martybegan]

This isn’t even a tempest in a teapot. It’s more like a quick light drizzle in a rainforest.

Whatever they do it won't be enough for the left, but they will still try to say the conservative justices are "breaking them" while the progressive justices can do no wrong.

 

[Lastamender]

I can imagine what their own ethics entail.

The Chief Justice flew on Epstein's jet.

 

[berg80]

Supreme Court under pressure issues ethics guidelines specific to justices

The Supreme Court on Monday issued a statement of ethics specific to the nine justices after reports of lavish and unreported travel and gifts for some of its members prompted intense public criticism and political pressure.

A statement from the court said that while “for the most part” the guidelines are not new, they were necessary for the public.

The absence of an ethics code “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,” said the statement signed by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and his eight colleagues. “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.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/13/supreme-court-ethics-code/

The absence of an ethics code “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,

Because one of them (Clarence) clearly has. This is way overdue and at least a sign John isn't completely tone deaf. Whether it restores faith in the SC on the part of the public is doubtful however.

 

[Lakhota]

SCOTUS CAVES: FIRST-EVER ETHICS CODE​

 

[Foxfyre]

The Supreme Court is adopting its first code of ethics, in the face of sustained criticism over undisclosed trips and gifts from wealthy benefactors to some justices.

The policy was issued by the court Monday. The justices, who have hinted at internal deliberations over an ethics code, last met Thursday in their private conference room at the court.

The issue has vexed the court for several months, over a series of stories questioning the ethical practices of the justices. Many of those stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. But Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor also have been under scrutiny.

The statement provided by Roberts said that the nine justices “reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The statement promised at least some small additional disclosure when one or more among them opts not to take part in a case. But the justices have been inconsistent in doing so since.

The Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

---

About damn time. Now, let's see if they proactively implement it. I know they won't but one can only hope.

Ethics can be so elusive in the eye of the beholder though. For instance Clarence and Ginny Thomas were close friends of Harlan Crow preceding Thomas's appointment to SCOTUS. Thomas was not required to report being guests of a friend as no money changed hands at least until recently when the rules were changed. Thomas and all the other justices have agreed to start reporting these things as ALL of them have wealthy friends who have entertained them from time to time.

Thomas was an issue only because a) he is so conservative and b) because he is seen as the most dangerous to the leftist agenda.

I think of the trips my husband and I have been able to take due to the generosity of more wealthy friends and family members, the meals at 5-star restaurants that we most likely never would have chosen to frequent, some very nice gifts we have received. Nothing would be different if I was a popular or influential politician, but certainly my political opposition/enemies would then accuse me of taking bribes or whatever.

So I hope SCOTUS does come up with a reasonable code of ethics to put down the vicious/malicious rumors and accusations. It is highly unlikely that such will change anything at all or needs to, but at least it would give the justices some personal protection.

 

[berg80]

A statement from the court said that while “for the most part” the guidelines are not new, they were necessary for the public.

Gee, that's patently false. Did a former employee from Trump's press office write the statement? Maybe they farmed it out to Sister Sarah.

 

[BULLDOG]

Half assed effort to divert attention. Nothing in that list prevents Clarance Thomases wife from taking leadership positions in MAGA efforts that appear before her husband's court.

 

[berg80]

Half assed effort to divert attention. Nothing in that list prevents Clarance Thomases wife from taking leadership positions in MAGA efforts that appear before her husband's court.

It's a tacit admission of Clarence's past wrongdoing.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Supreme Court under pressure issues ethics guidelines specific to justices

The Supreme Court on Monday issued a statement of ethics specific to the nine justices after reports of lavish and unreported travel and gifts for some of its members prompted intense public criticism and political pressure.

A statement from the court said that while “for the most part” the guidelines are not new, they were necessary for the public.

The absence of an ethics code “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,” said the statement signed by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and his eight colleagues. “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.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/13/supreme-court-ethics-code/

The absence of an ethics code “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,

Because one of them (Clarence) clearly has. This is way overdue and at least a sign John isn't completely tone deaf. Whether it restores faith in the SC on the part of the public is doubtful however.

Since the court is conservative you never had confidence in it. Hell leftist judges got those sweetheart gifts I bet you don't have a problem with that

 

[BULLDOG]

It's a tacit admission of Clarence's past wrongdoing.

But nothing to prevent him repeating his unethical behavior.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Rumors have begun of early retirements by Alito and Thomas.

 

[berg80]

Whatever they do it won't be enough for the left, but they will still try to say the conservative justices are "breaking them" while the progressive justices can do no wrong.

Last week, Senate Democrats turned up the pressure, opening debate on the authorization of subpoenas for more information about those trips from Texas billionaire Harlan Crow, a longtime friend of Thomas, and judicial activist Leonard Leo, who was instrumental in building the conservative supermajority on the court.

Hopefully, this doesn't deter the Senate investigation.

 

[Magnus]

Rumors have begun of early retirements by Alito and Thomas.

Nah. They will go out feet first.

Would you retire if you had a job for life with a nice income to boot? Not to mention all the other perks that go with it.

 

[Magnus]

Ethics can be so elusive in the eye of the beholder though. For instance Clarence and Ginny Thomas were close friends of Harlan Crow preceding Thomas's appointment to SCOTUS. Thomas was not required to report being guests of a friend as no money changed hands at least until recently when the rules were changed. Thomas and all the other justices have agreed to start reporting these things as ALL of them have wealthy friends who have entertained them from time to time.

Thomas was an issue only because a) he is so conservative and b) because he is seen as the most dangerous to the leftist agenda.

I think of the trips my husband and I have been able to take due to the generosity of more wealthy friends and family members, the meals at 5-star restaurants that we most likely never would have chosen to frequent, some very nice gifts we have received. Nothing would be different if I was a popular or influential politician, but certainly my political opposition/enemies would then accuse me of taking bribes or whatever.

So I hope SCOTUS does come up with a reasonable code of ethics to put down the vicious/malicious rumors and accusations. It is highly unlikely that such will change anything at all or needs to, but at least it would give the justices some personal protection.

You really don't understand the difference between accepting gifts as an ordinary citizen as opposed to a federal employee? Really?

 

[dudmuck]

Last week, Senate Democrats turned up the pressure, opening debate on the authorization of subpoenas for more information about those trips from Texas billionaire Harlan Crow, a longtime friend of Thomas, and judicial activist Leonard Leo, who was instrumental in building the conservative supermajority on the court.

Hopefully, this doesn't deter the Senate investigation.

 

[dudmuck]

The Supreme Court is adopting its first code of ethics, in the face of sustained criticism over undisclosed trips and gifts from wealthy benefactors to some justices.

The policy was issued by the court Monday. The justices, who have hinted at internal deliberations over an ethics code, last met Thursday in their private conference room at the court.

The issue has vexed the court for several months, over a series of stories questioning the ethical practices of the justices. Many of those stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. But Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor also have been under scrutiny.

The statement provided by Roberts said that the nine justices “reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The statement promised at least some small additional disclosure when one or more among them opts not to take part in a case. But the justices have been inconsistent in doing so since.

The Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

---

About damn time. Now, let's see if they proactively implement it. I know they won't but one can only hope.