Supreme Court ethics code just dropped—and it has no teeth

The MoJo Daily newsletter, Monday through Friday. [View in browser]( [Mother Jones Daily Newsletter](     November 13, 2023 The Supreme Court dropped a 14-page ethics code today. It follows months of intense public pressure spurred by several reports, including a series of ProPublica [investigations]( that exposed the luxury trips (and other perks) that Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas enjoyed—courtesy of wealthy benefactors—without disclosing them to the court. The ethics code appears to implicitly acknowledge some of the controversies those investigations sparked, noting, for example, that justices "reaffirm" commitments they allegedly had once made to disclose their finances, and that they "should comply with the restrictions on acceptance of gifts and the prohibition on solicitation of gifts." But it also asserts that most of the outlined rules are "not new." Indeed, according to the document, the justices have long abided by a nebulous set of "common law ethics rules." The new formalized code has been issued merely to dispel "the misunderstanding that the Justices of this Court, unlike all other jurists in this country, regard themselves as unrestricted by any ethics rules." As my colleague Arianna Coghill just [reported](, the new ethics code lacks teeth—specifically, any independent enforcement mechanisms to ensure the justices abide by the rules. (A control-F search for "enforcement" in the document quite literally returns no results.) Instead, the justices want you just to trust that they'll do the right thing. They promise! Look! They even signed (well, typed) their names! So what do you think of the high court's ethics code? What's missing? Are their promises enough, or should there be some external enforcement mechanism? Anything else? [Let us know](. —Julianne McShane Advertisement [House Subscriptions Ad]( [Top Story] [Top Story]( [Supreme Court Finally Adopts a Code of Ethics. But It Has No Teeth.]( The new rules do not appear to have any independent means of enforcement. BY ARIANNA COGHILL FROM THE MOTHER JONES STORE   Mother Jones Store T-shirts, books, back issues, and new merchandise! Go to the official Mother Jones Store and show your support beyond the pages. [Check us out!]( [Trending] [Trump campaign defends Nazi-era "vermin" threat with another incendiary threat]( BY JULIANNE MCSHANE   [Gaza's health system is "on its knees"]( BY ISABELA DIAS   [Progressive Facebook moms' groups are melting down over the Israel-Hamas war]( BY KIERA BUTLER   [Republicans are linking aid for Ukraine and Israel to tough immigration policies]( BY ISABELA DIAS Advertisement [House Bookshop Ad]( [Special Feature] [Special Feature]( [How Gilded Age lawmakers saved America from plutocracy]( And how the Biden administration is using their playbook to take on Big Tech. BY DANIEL SCHULMAN [Fiercely Independent] Support from readers allows Mother Jones to do journalism that doesn't just follow the pack. [Donate]( Did you enjoy this newsletter? Help us out by [forwarding]( it to a friend or sharing it on [Facebook]( and [Twitter](. [Mother Jones]( [Donate]( [Donate Monthly]( [Subscribe]( This message was sent to {EMAIL}. To change the messages you receive from us, you can [edit your email preferences]( or [unsubscribe from all mailings.]( For advertising opportunities see our online [media kit.]( Were you forwarded this email? [Sign up for Mother Jones' newsletters today.]( [www.MotherJones.com]( PO Box 8539, Big Sandy, TX 75755