The Left wants nothing more to have the Supreme Court full of liberal justices. They’ll do anything to make that a reality.
And Democrats have launched an all out attack on these conservative justices on the Supreme Court.
Senate Democrats concluded a nearly two-year investigation into the ethical practices of the Supreme Court on Saturday, issuing a damning final report that scrutinized the court’s conservative justices. The 97-page report accuses members of the bench of improper conduct, including accepting extravagant gifts and failing to recuse themselves in cases where conflicts of interest were apparent.
“Now more than ever before, as a result of information gathered by subpoenas, we know the extent to which the Supreme Court is mired in an ethical crisis of its own making,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL) in a statement released alongside the report.
The investigation honed in on long-standing allegations against Justice Clarence Thomas, asserting that he had received millions of dollars in the form of gifts over many years. According to the report, these gifts represent a level of opulence with “no comparison in modern American history.” It also claims that Thomas ceased disclosing the majority of gifts he received after a 2004 public controversy surrounding his finances, a decision the report characterizes as a “violation of federal law.”
Justice Samuel Alito also came under fire in the report, which accuses him of abusing the personal-hospitality exemption to justify a 2008 fishing trip in Alaska. The trip, which included accommodations at a luxury lodge costing over $1,000 per night, was reportedly funded by hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer. The report further alleges that Alito’s actions—along with his wife flying an inverted American flag on their property on January 6, 2021—created multiple instances of perceived impropriety, warranting his recusal from certain cases under federal law.
Ethical Concerns and Exemptions
The report notably avoids direct accusations against the court’s three Democratic-appointed justices: Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. However, it acknowledges that past ethical controversies involving Sotomayor—such as allegations that her staff urged schools and libraries to purchase her memoir—and questions surrounding Jackson’s financial disclosures have drawn criticism. Their omission from the report stands out, given its broad scope.
The findings have drawn sharp rebukes from conservative defenders of the court. Mark Paoletta, a close ally of Justice Thomas, dismissed the investigation as a partisan attack. “Justice Thomas and Justice Alito COMPLIED with the laws, regulations, advice, and Judicial Conference rulings regarding the reporting of trips with friends. It was not required under the personal hospitality exception, no matter what Durbin and Whitehouse claim or wish,” Paoletta wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter).
The Judicial Conference recently revised its guidelines to loosen reporting requirements for stays at private residences registered under LLCs. Judges are now exempt from disclosing such visits unless they are related to business activities—a change that further complicates public debates on judicial ethics.
A Legislative Push for Reform
The investigation and subsequent report come as Senate Democrats intensify efforts to establish a binding code of ethics for the Supreme Court. A proposed bill, the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act, passed out of committee in September 2023. The legislation aims to introduce enforceable ethical standards, including clearer rules on recusals and the disclosure of financial ties.
“Chief Justice Roberts’s continued unwillingness to implement the only viable solution to the Court’s ethical crisis—an enforceable code of conduct—requires Congress to act to restore the public’s confidence in the highest court in the land,” the report argues.
However, the push for reform has encountered significant resistance. Chief Justice John Roberts has publicly resisted congressional oversight of the judiciary, citing “separation of powers” concerns. Earlier this year, Roberts declined requests by Senators Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) to discuss ethical reforms, emphasizing the independence of the judiciary.
Justice Alito has also been outspoken, asserting that Congress lacks the constitutional authority to regulate the internal operations of the Supreme Court. Republicans have echoed this argument, warning that imposing such regulations could jeopardize the balance of power between branches of government.
Ethical Code Already in Place?
In response to growing public pressure, the Supreme Court adopted a code of ethics last year, explicitly directed at its nine members. While the move was celebrated as a step forward, it has also faced criticism. Supporters argue that the court has historically adhered to ethical guidelines meant for lower courts, while critics insist that the new code lacks enforcement mechanisms. Some Democrats have called for the creation of an independent oversight body to investigate and recommend disciplinary action for alleged violations.
“The justices interpret the law, but they are not above it,” the report concludes. “The Roberts Court has seemingly forgotten this, and the only way forward is the implementation of an enforceable code of conduct.”
As Democrats push for reform, the constitutional debate over Congress’s authority to legislate Supreme Court ethics looms large. With Republicans largely opposed to the proposed changes and the high court resistant to external regulation, it remains unclear whether legislative efforts will gain the traction needed to reshape the ethical framework of the nation’s highest court. But many conservatives view the Left’s push for an ethical rework of the Supreme Court, as a way to undermine it and remove conservative justices for not meeting their so-called ethical standards.
Stay tuned to The Federalist Wire.
