Photo credit: thehill.com

Judicial Conference Declines to Refer Ethics Violations of Supreme Court Justices

The Judicial Conference of the United States has opted not to refer allegations regarding ethics violations by Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Department of Justice. This decision comes after investigation requests from lawmakers, including Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), who were prompted by reports published by ProPublica concerning Thomas’s acceptance of undisclosed luxury trips.

In letters addressed to Whitehouse and Johnson, the Conference raised doubts about its authority to refer justices for investigation. Robert Conrad, the Judicial Conference Secretary, indicated that the Thomas inquiry had largely become irrelevant following the request by Democrats for Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to look into the matter.

“Justice Thomas has filed amended financial disclosure statements that tackle several concerns highlighted in your letter,” Conrad explained in his correspondence.

He also noted Thomas’s commitment to adhere to directives similar to those issued for other federal judges, implying no evidence of ethical misconduct on Thomas’s part. “That provides one answer to your referral request,” he stated.

The Judicial Conference also addressed an inquiry regarding Jackson, a Supreme Court justice appointed by President Biden. Critics had voiced concerns about her non-disclosure of income stemming from her husband’s consulting work in medical malpractice and questioned the funding source for her investiture ceremony. In a separate communication to the Center for Renewing America, the Conference ruled out any referrals for Jackson.

Rachel Cauley, a spokesperson for the Center for Renewing America, commented on the situation, “It’s a sad commentary that the media does not care about liberal justices not following the ethics disclosure rules and a think tank needs to file a complaint to get it covered and effect change.”

Conrad’s letter indicated that Jackson had amended her financial disclosures to correct the oversight involving her husband’s income. It also raised questions about the Conference’s legal capability to refer justices for misconduct, suggesting that further evaluation of this authority will be conducted in the future.

“There is reason to doubt that the Conference has any such authority,” he stated, highlighting constitutional concerns regarding the role of the Judicial Conference in supervising the Supreme Court. “No such clear directive appears in this provision, and in fact, the provision suggests the contrary,” he added.

The Supreme Court has faced significant scrutiny over ethics, especially following revelations that Thomas received lavish trips and gifts from billionaire Harlan Crow, a major Republican donor. Thomas had justified these instances by asserting they were not required to be disclosed under past guidelines, which have since evolved.

Both Democratic and Republican appointees to the Court have been embroiled in their own ethics controversies, leading to escalating demands from Democrats for stricter ethical regulations surrounding justices. Nonetheless, these attempts to impose further rules have been met with resistance from Republican lawmakers, who argue that such movements are designed to undermine the conservative majority on the Court.

Rather than complying with requests for external oversight, the Supreme Court has issued a new statement of ethical principles, to which all justices have committed. However, Democrats have criticized the document for lacking any enforceable mechanisms.

Whitehouse and Johnson, prominent critics of the Supreme Court, have continuously urged the federal judiciary to take action against Thomas for potential breaches of financial disclosure obligations. Responding to the Conference’s decisions, Whitehouse remarked, “The judiciary’s response contains a number of inconsistencies and strange claims, and ultimately doesn’t address the only real question the Judicial Conference should’ve been focused on for the nearly two years it spent on this matter: Is there reasonable cause to believe that Justice Thomas willfully broke the disclosure law?”

He further expressed concern that the judicial branch is neglecting its duty to hold a Supreme Court justice accountable for ethics violations.

Updated at 9:55 a.m. EST

Source
thehill.com