Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats Ask Chief Justice Roberts for Information Regarding Supreme Court Ethics Ahead of Hearing on May 2

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today led all Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats in a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts seeking additional information on the “Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices” the Chief Justice attached in a letter to Durbin declining his invitation to testify before the Committee on May 2 at a public hearing regarding Supreme Court ethics reform.

“On April 25, you sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee declining an invitation to appear, or to designate a Justice to appear, in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss the Supreme Court’s approach to ethics matters,” the Senators wrote.  “It is noteworthy that no Justice will speak to the American people after numerous revelations have called the Court’s ethical standards into question, even though sitting Justices have testified before Senate or House Committees on at least 92 occasions since 1960.”

The Senators’ letter continues, “Your letter states that ‘[i]n regard to the Court’s approach to ethics matters, I attach a Statement of Ethics Principles and Practices to which all of the current Members of the Supreme Court subscribe.’  The statement of principles raises more questions than it resolves, and we request that you respond to several key questions.  Your answers will inform the Committee’s work on legislation that seeks to ensure that the ethical obligations and practices of the Justices are at least on par with those that govern the rest of the federal judiciary and the federal government generally.”

The questions in the Senators’ letter ask: (1) on what date the Justices subscribed to this Statement and whether the Justices had subscribed to any previous statement of ethics principles; (2) whether the Court requires unanimity among the Justices in order to adopt resolutions to follow ethics regulations; (3) whether the Justices receive guidance on which authorities to consult on ethical issues and whether this consultation is documented; (4) whether Justices currently face any consequence for errors or omissions in the filing of their financial disclosure reports; and (5) whether under the Statement there is any process for the public to file complaints that a Justice has failed to abide by the principles in the Statement and any penalty imposed on a Justice for failure to abide by the principles.  The Senators request a response by May 1, in advance of the May 2 hearing on legislation to reform Supreme Court ethics.

According to the Congressional Research Service, since 1960, Supreme Court Justices have appeared before Congress to testify in at least 92 hearings, addressing such issues as the constitutional role of judges, judicial security, annual appropriations for the courts, and judicial compensation. 

On April 10, Durbin and his Senate Judiciary Committee Democratic colleagues sent a letter to the Chief Justice urging him to take swift action to address reported conduct by Justices that is inconsistent with the ethical standards the American people expect of public servants.  The letter noted that as far back as 2012, Judiciary Committee Democrats had written the Chief Justice urging that the Court adopt a resolution binding the Justices to the same Code of Conduct that binds all other federal judges.  The letter advised that the Committee would hold an upcoming hearing, and that if the Court doesn’t resolve this issue on its own, the Committee will consider legislation to resolve it.

Durbin received a response letter from the Secretary of the Judicial Conference of the United States and it stated that the Senators’ April 10 letter was referred to the Judicial Conference and forwarded to the Judicial Conference Committee on Financial Disclosure. 

Full text of today’s letter is available here and below:

April 27, 2023

Dear Chief Justice Roberts:

On April 25, you sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee declining an invitation to appear, or to designate a Justice to appear, in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss the Supreme Court’s approach to ethics matters.  It is noteworthy that no Justice will speak to the American people after numerous revelations have called the Court’s ethical standards into question, even though sitting Justices have testified before Senate or House Committees on at least 92 occasions since 1960.

Your letter states that “[i]n regard to the Court’s approach to ethics matters, I attach a Statement of Ethics Principles and Practices to which all of the current Members of the Supreme Court subscribe.”  The statement of principles raises more questions than it resolves, and we request that you respond to several key questions.  Your answers will inform the Committee’s work on legislation that seeks to ensure that the ethical obligations and practices of the Justices are at least on par with those that govern the rest of the federal judiciary and the federal government generally.  We request that you provide these answers by May 1, so that they may be discussed during the Committee’s hearing the following day.

1. On what date did the Justices subscribe to the Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices that you attached to your letter, and had the Justices subscribed to any previous statement of ethics principles and practices before that date?  If so, please provide any such statement.
2. The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices notes that “[i]n 1991, Members of the Court voluntarily adopted a resolution to follow the substance of the Judicial Conference Regulations.”  Does the Court currently require unanimity among the Justices in order to adopt a resolution to follow the substance of ethics regulations?
3. The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices provides that “Justices, like other federal judges, consult a wide variety of authorities to address specific ethical issues.” What guidance do Justices receive on which authorities to consult, and how is this consultation process and any final decision on a particular matter documented?
4. The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices provides that “[a]llegations of errors or omissions in the filing of financial disclosure reports are referred by the Secretary of the Judicial Conference to the Committee on Financial Disclosure. The Committee may send the filer a letter of inquiry, providing an opportunity for the filer to respond as appropriate.”  What is the consequence, if any, for a sitting Justice who does not respond as appropriate to such a letter of inquiry?
5. Has there ever been any censure, reprimand, admonition, sanction, or other penalty imposed on a Justice for failure to abide by any of the principles and practices now contained in the Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices?  If so, what types of penalties have been, or may be, imposed?  Is there a process by which the public may file, and the Supreme Court may receive, complaints that a Justice has failed to abide by these principles?

Thank you for your prompt attention to these questions.  We look forward to your responses as we work to craft legislation that will help ensure public confidence in the Court’s approach to ethical obligations. 

Sincerely,

-30-