By Andrew Chung and John Kruzel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday announced its first formal code of conduct governing the ethical behavior of its nine justices, bowing to months of outside pressure over revelations of undisclosed luxury trips and hobnobbing with wealthy benefactors.
The new code received mixed reviews, with some critics noting the apparent absence of any enforcement mechanism. It was adopted after a series of media reports detailing ethics questions concerning some Supreme Court members, in particular conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, even as Senate Democrats pursued long-shot legislation to mandate an ethics code for the nation’s top judicial body.
Unlike other members of the federal judiciary, the Supreme Court’s life-tenured justices had long acted with no binding ethics code. That absence, the court said in a statement accompanying the code, had led some to believe that the justices “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 statement said.
The nine-page code contains sections codifying that justices should not allow outside relationships to influence their official conduct or judgment, placing restrictions on justices participating in fundraising and reiterating limits on the accepting of gifts. It also states that justices should not “to any substantial degree” use their judicial resources or staff to engage in non-official activities.
A commentary elaborating on some of the code’s provisions said that justices who are weighing a speaking opportunity should “consider whether doing so would create an appearance of impropriety in the minds of reasonable members of the public.”
Democratic U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who for years has pressed the justices on ethics, said, “This is a long-overdue step by the justices, but a code of ethics is not binding unless there is a mechanism to investigate possible violations and enforce the rules.”
Steven Lubet, a legal ethics expert who teaches law at Northwestern University, said the court’s code “answers a public demand in a very respectful and thorough way.” But Lubet noted specific shortcomings, including the court’s reiteration that the justices will decide for themselves whether to recuse from a case.
“Nobody should be the sole determiner of their own biases, but they maintain that,” Lubet said.
The court has been buffeted for months by revelations regarding justices over undisclosed trips on private jets, luxury vacations, real estate and recreational vehicle deals, and more.
The issue had become an political flashpoint, with Democrats in Congress calling on the court to adopt an ethics code, while many Republicans viewed the ethics narrative involving the court as cooked up by liberals upset at its rightward leanings.
The ethics drum beat added pressure to a court already facing declining public approval following major rulings in its past two terms powered by its 6-3 conservative majority. The court ended its recognition of a constitutional right to abortion, expanded gun rights and rejected affirmative action collegiate admissions policies often used to increase Black and Hispanic student enrollment.
The news outlet ProPublica has detailed luxury trips taken for years by Thomas provided by Texas businessman Harlan Crow as well as real estate transactions involving the justice and the billionaire Republican donor. A report by Senate Democrats found that Thomas apparently failed to repay at least a “significant portion” of a $267,230 loan he received from longtime friend Anthony Welters to buy a luxury motor coach.
ProPublica also detailed an undisclosed 2008 flight that conservative Justice Samuel Alito took on a private jet provided by billionaire hedge fund founder Paul Singer for a luxury fishing trip in Alaska.
Other media reports have detailed a real estate transaction involving conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch and the chief executive of a major law firm, as well as aides promoting sales of books by liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor in conjunction with her public speaking events.
An August Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 39% of U.S. adults surveyed held a positive view of the court.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)
