The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
After months of calling for the U.S. Supreme Court to institute a code of ethics, we have to admit, we are somewhat pleasantly surprised that the justices actually have done so for the first time in the court’s history.
Major questions remain about the enforceability of this code, to be sure, so we aren’t ready to celebrate. But this should be recognized as a step forward after at least some justices appeared dug in with a status quo that left the American public wondering if the highest court in the land had to follow high ethics standards — or any ethics standards at all. This code, at the very least, makes these standards clear even if their enforcement remains murky.
Early reaction to this new nine-page code has been all over the place. Some have called it toothless. Others, like retired conservative federal judge Michael Luttig, who previously and powerfully implored his former judiciary colleagues to enact an ethics code, said the development “is of surpassing historic significance.” Luttig made those comments to ProPublica, where recent reporting on court ethics issues (particularly involving Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas and their connections to billionaire donors) have undoubtedly helped move this much-needed shift forward.
Among the diverging reactions, we fall somewhere in the middle. Not unlike U.S. Sens. Angus King and Lisa Murkowski, we welcome the development while simultaneously feeling like it doesn’t go far enough.
“It’s welcome news that the Supreme Court has taken the steps to draft and adopt its own code of conduct. The Court’s authority rests entirely upon its credibility and integrity and the American people want to know that there is a guidebook for occupying a seat on our nation’s highest court,” King and Murkowski said in a joint statement on Monday. “This code of conduct will help rebuild the credibility gap that we have started to see in our highest judicial institution.”
King, a Maine independent who caucuses with the Democrats, and Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, have teamed up on legislation that would require the court to create its own code of conduct. Importantly, it also would create a process to review potential conflicts of interest on the court.
Their effort, perhaps more so than any other in the push to shore up ethical guidelines for the Supreme Court, has been significant because of its bipartisan nature. There is a bipartisan — or even better, nonpartisan — imperative to make sure the American public can trust that the Supreme Court is being definitely held to a strict set of ethical requirements. Vague half-commitments and value statements have clearly not been enough, and an actual code will surely be better even if it needs to be continually strengthened.
“While the Court’s code doesn’t go as far as we would have liked, it’s an important step in the right direction towards reestablishing public confidence in the judiciary,” King and Murkowski continued.
That is really what our recent calls for stronger Supreme Court ethics have been all about, and this focus on public confidence must remain front and center in continued progress. Ideally, that progress will continue to come from within the court, with justices realizing that a truly meaningful and trustworthy ethics code will require stronger (and actual) enforcement mechanisms. Should they fail to reach that conclusion, and fail to continue to act, then Congress should stand ready to step in.
As always, Americans deserve to know that the public institutions and officials serving them are doing just that — serving the people, not themselves. This requires continued reform across all branches of the federal government.