Supreme Court to adopt ethics code after scrutiny of undisclosed gifts

[ThatRobGuy]

Supreme Court to adopt ethics code after scrutiny of undisclosed gifts

The Supreme Court indicated Monday it will adopt a code of conduct amid heightened scrutiny over the high court’s standards when it comes to undisclosed gifts and trips. In a statement released alo…

thehill.com

The Supreme Court indicated Monday it will adopt a code of conduct amid heightened scrutiny over the high court’s standards when it comes to undisclosed gifts and trips.

In a statement released alongside the 15-page code, the justices said the court’s rules and principles are, for the most part, “not new.” However, “codification” of existing principles is meant to clear up concerns about the justices operating without oversight.


Among those notable reports was one by ProPublica earlier this year, which reported that Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors, including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers.

ProPublica also reported that Justice Samuel Alito accepted a flight on the private jet of billionaire Paul Singer, who has had cases before the court.

And the Associated Press reported accusations that Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s staff pushed colleges to purchase her books when she traveled to their schools. Sotomayor previously received criticism for not recusing herself from multiple cases involving Penguin Random House, which published her books and provided her payments totaling more than $3 million, according to her financial disclosures.

 

[Gene2memE]

That's a fairly ignominious reversal, given Chief Justice Roberts' decade long protestations that the Court didn't need a code of conduct because of its "unique circumstances" and recent opinion pieces written by some Justices.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That's a fairly ignominious reversal, given Chief Justice Roberts' decade long protestations that the Court didn't need a code of conduct because of its "unique circumstances" and recent opinion pieces written by some Justices.

It's one of those things where I don't think they had a choice.

With regards to ethics rules for high ranking government employees, unfortunately, things don't seem to be implemented until neither side can claim to hold the "moral high ground" anymore.

How the pattern usually works:

- Side A engages in XYZ
- Side B makes it their cause de jour shine a spotlight on it and definitively say "I'm against that!"
- It gets uncovered that someone their side did it as well
- Side A pounces on it
- Everyone realizes they have no choice but to do an "across the board" condemnation to save face and feign consistency

 

[Bradskii]

I'm quite surprised that they didn't have one.

 

[Gene2memE]

Important to note that while this codifies the loosey goosey ethics rules that the court largely followed already, it does not introduce any oversight or enforcement mechanisms.

So, basically now people can officially 'tut tut' but they still can't do squat if the rules are broken or a judge fails to recuse themselves.

 

[Laodicean60]

Why in the hell would anyone need a code of conduct?

 

[Bradskii]

Why in the hell would anyone need a code of conduct?

If you're working somewhere that can approve contracts, can the person who works for the contractor:
Buy you a beer at a social event?
Ask you to attend a social environment as a guest?
Ask you to attend an event and pay your expenses to get there?
Give you a 'momento' of the event?
Do you have to declare any of that to your company?

Etcetera etcetera.

There'll be a line which you might cross and think nothing of it. But the company you work for might prefer that you didn't. Hence codes of conduct.

 

[Larniavc]

Why in the hell would anyone need a code of conduct?

To stop all the ‘gifts’ that in no way affect rulings.

 

[Laodicean60]

If you're working somewhere that can approve contracts, can the person who works for the contractor:
Buy you a beer at a social event?
Ask you to attend a social environment as a guest?
Ask you to attend an event and pay your expenses to get there?
Give you a 'momento' of the event?
Do you have to declare any of that to your company?

Etcetera etcetera.

There'll be a line which you might cross and think nothing of it. But the company you work for might prefer that you didn't. Hence codes of conduct.

I view the code of ethics as integrity and honesty and conduct as behavior as you mentioned. You could be right I've been out of the workforce for a while and haven't had my yearly training.

 

[wing2000]

Important to note that while this codifies the loosey goosey ethics rules that the court largely followed already, it does not introduce any oversight or enforcement mechanisms.

So, basically now people can officially 'tut tut' but they still can't do squat if the rules are broken or a judge fails to recuse themselves.

....and therefore meaningless.