In a recent interview, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson emphasized the importance of transparency regarding gifts received by judges, stating that the public has a right to this information.
As reported by Axios, Jackson's comments come at a time when the Supreme Court is facing increased scrutiny over undisclosed trips and gifts and calls for ethical reforms.
Justice Jackson, the first Black woman to serve on the nation's highest court, expressed her views on judicial impartiality and ethical obligations during an interview on "CBS Sunday Morning." Her statements have sparked discussions about the need for a binding code of ethics for Supreme Court justices, a topic that has gained traction amid recent controversies.
The Supreme Court's public approval has been a subject of concern, as reflected in a recent Gallup poll. Conducted in July, the survey revealed that only 43% of Americans approve of the court's performance.
The poll also highlighted significant disparities in support along party lines, with 66% of Republicans expressing approval for the court's work in the previous term, compared to 44% of Independents and a mere 15% of Democrats.
These figures underscore the challenges faced by the Supreme Court in maintaining public trust and confidence. The low approval ratings, particularly among Democrats, suggest a growing partisan divide in perceptions of the court's decisions and overall functioning.
Justice Jackson's comments on gift disclosure and impartiality come against this backdrop of waning public trust. By advocating for transparency, she appears to be addressing concerns about potential conflicts of interest and the need for greater accountability in the judiciary.
Jackson elaborated on the significance of gift disclosure in maintaining judicial impartiality. She stated:
That's what the rules are about. People are entitled to know if you are accepting gifts as a judge so that they can evaluate whether or not your opinions are impartial.
This statement underscores the fundamental principle that judges should not only be impartial but also be perceived as such by the public. By emphasizing the public's right to information about gifts received by judges, Jackson highlights the connection between transparency and trust in the judicial system.
While declining to comment on specific cases involving other justices, Jackson affirmed her commitment to following ethical rules. She expressed openness to supporting an ethics code for Supreme Court justices, noting that such codes are standard for judges in other courts.
The discussion surrounding ethical guidelines for Supreme Court justices has gained momentum in recent months. President Biden proposed a series of reforms in July, including the establishment of an ethics code that would require justices to disclose gifts and refrain from political activity. These proposals aim to address concerns about potential conflicts of interest and maintain the integrity of the court.
Justice Jackson, while refraining from commenting on specific policy proposals, expressed her views on the potential implementation of an ethics code for the Supreme Court. She stated:
A binding code of ethics is pretty standard for judges. And so I guess the question is, is the Supreme Court any different? And I guess I have not seen a persuasive reason as to why the court is different than the other courts.
In conclusion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's recent comments have brought renewed attention to the issue of transparency and ethical conduct within the Supreme Court. Her advocacy for gift disclosure and openness to ethical reforms comes when public trust in the court is at a low point. The debate over implementing a binding code of ethics for Supreme Court justices is likely to continue as stakeholders weigh the potential benefits of increased transparency against concerns about judicial independence.
