Two Supreme Court justices face scrutiny over their financial disclosure practices amid growing calls for stricter ethical guidelines.
According to The Hill, the federal judiciary's policymaking body has declined to refer Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Justice Department over alleged ethics violations.
The Judicial Conference's decision was communicated through letters sent Thursday to Democratic lawmakers Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and Rep. Hank Johnson, who had requested investigations into Thomas following ProPublica's reports about his undisclosed luxury trips.
The conference also addressed complaints about Jackson's failure to disclose her husband's medical malpractice consulting income.
Judicial Conference Secretary Robert Conrad emphasized that Thomas had already filed amended financial disclosure statements addressing the concerns raised in the lawmakers' letter.
The matter became largely moot when Democrats requested Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate Thomas. The conference noted that Thomas has agreed to follow guidance issued to other federal judges, suggesting compliance with ethical standards.
The conference's response to complaints about Jackson followed a similar pattern. After receiving criticism from the Center for Renewing America regarding unreported income from her husband's consulting work, Jackson amended her financial disclosure forms. The conservative group had also questioned the undisclosed private funding source for Jackson's investiture ceremony at the Library of Congress.
The Judicial Conference raised significant questions about its own authority to make referrals involving Supreme Court justices. Conrad's letter suggested fundamental doubts about the conference's jurisdiction over the Supreme Court, citing potential constitutional concerns.
The ethics controversy gained momentum in 2023 when ProPublica revealed Thomas's acceptance of luxury trips and gifts from Republican mega-donor Harlan Crow. Thomas defended his actions, stating that previous guidance did not require disclosure of such trips. The revelations sparked a broader debate about judicial ethics reform.
Democrats have intensified their calls for stricter ethics rules, while Republicans oppose such measures, viewing them as attempts to undermine the conservative-majority court. The Supreme Court's response included releasing a new statement of ethical principles endorsed by all justices, though Democrats criticize its lack of enforcement mechanisms.
Sen. Whitehouse, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on federal courts, expressed dissatisfaction with the Judicial Conference's response. He stated:
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?
The Judicial Conference's decision marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over Supreme Court ethics reform. The conference's declination to refer either Thomas or Jackson to the Justice Department highlights the complex relationship between the federal judiciary's oversight bodies and the Supreme Court.
As Democrats continue pushing for stronger ethics regulations and Republicans maintain their opposition, the Supreme Court's approach to ethical guidelines remains a contentious issue in American jurisprudence.
