# What the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act Actually Does

Right now, Supreme Court justices operate under almost no formal ethics rules. Unlike other federal judges, they don't have a written code of conduct they must follow, and there's no real process for investigating complaints about their behavior. This bill would change that by creating actual accountability measures for the nation's highest court.

The bill requires the Supreme Court to create a formal code of ethics within six months and establish a system for handling complaints against justices. If someone believes a justice has violated ethics rules or has a conflict of interest, they could file a complaint that would be reviewed by a panel of five circuit court judges. This panel would investigate, hold hearings if needed, and make recommendations to the Supreme Court about whether discipline is warranted. The findings would be made public unless the panel decides certain sensitive information should be kept private. The bill also requires the Supreme Court to post all ethics rules, guidance, and related documents on its website so the public can actually see what standards justices are supposed to follow.

On the conflict-of-interest side, the bill expands when judges must step aside from cases. It adds new situations requiring disqualification, including when a party to a case or their affiliates gave gifts or money to a judge in the past six years, or when they spent substantial funds supporting the judge's nomination or confirmation. The bill also requires judges to immediately notify all parties if they discover a potential conflict. Additionally, when parties file briefs with the Supreme Court, they'd have to disclose any gifts, money, or speaking fees they or their lawyers gave to any justice in the previous two years, as well as any lobbying they did to support a justice's appointment.

The practical effect is significant: the Supreme Court would finally operate under the same basic ethics framework as other courts, with public disclosure requirements and an actual complaint process. However, the bill doesn't give anyone power to force a justice to recuse themselves—the justice still makes the final call on whether to step aside, though now there's a process for other judges to review disputed recusal decisions. For everyday Americans, this means more transparency about potential conflicts when major cases are decided, though skeptics note that enforcement ultimately still depends on justices' willingness to follow the rules.

Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023

Johnson, Henry C. "Hank"

Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023 This bill makes various changes related to the ethical standards, financial disclosure requirements, and recusal requirements that apply to Supreme Court Justices. Among the changes, the bill requires the Supreme Court to <ul type="disc"> <li>adopt a code of conduct for Justices and establish procedures to receive and investigate complaints of judicial misconduct;</li> <li>adopt rules governing the disclosure of gifts, travel, and income received by the Justices and law clerks that are at least as rigorous as the House and Senate disclosure rules; and </li> <li>establish procedural rules requiring each party or amicus to disclose any gift, income, or reimbursement provided to Justices. </li> </ul> Additionally, the bill <ul type="disc"> <li>expands the circumstances under which a Justice or judge must be disqualified; and </li> <li>requires the Supreme Court and the Judicial Conference to establish procedural rules for prohibiting the filing of or striking an amicus brief that would result in the disqualification of a Justice, judge, or magistrate judge. </li></ul>