Federal Judge Absolutely NAILS Supreme Court's Ethics Dumpster Fire

(Photographer: Samuel Corum/Bloomberg)

The Supreme Court abides by no ethical code and it shows.

Clarence Thomas received roughly half a million in undisclosed gifts from a billionaire, Sam Alito took free luxury vacations including one where he traveled on a billionaire's private jet (and didn't bother to later recuse himself when that guy needed the Supreme Court to do him a solid!), and Sonia Sotomayor failed to recuse herself in cases involving her publisher (and used public employees to perform tasks for her personal book sales, which may or may not be acceptable under general ethics principles). And we're not even getting into the "not really a scandal but feels a little icky" like Venmogate.

And the Supreme Court has a plan! Oh, just kidding. The Supreme Court has no plan and feels anyone who thinks they should have a plan should promptly f**k themselves.

In today's New York Times, Judge Michael Ponsor of the District of Massachusetts wrote a measured, eloquent, and absolutely scathing rebuke of the Supreme Court's ethical cesspool.

The recent descriptions of the behavior of some of our justices and particularly their attempts to defend their conduct have not just raised my eyebrows; they've raised the whole top of my head. Lavish, no-cost vacations? Hypertechnical arguments about how a free private airplane flight is a kind of facility? A justice's spouse prominently involved in advocating on issues before the court without the justice's recusal? Repeated omissions in mandatory financial disclosure statements brushed under the rug as inadvertent? A justice's taxpayer-financed staff reportedly helping to promote her books? Private school tuition for a justice's family member covered by a wealthy benefactor? Wow.

Judge Ponsor offers examples from his own career where he turned down gifts that wouldn't even be visible if graphed next to just Sam Alito's shenanigans because that's what judges are supposed to do. Indeed, what judges must do.

All my judicial colleagues, whoever has appointed them, run into situations like these regularly, and I expect they have responded in just the same way. You don't just stay inside the lines; you stay well inside the lines. This is not a matter of politics or judicial philosophy. It is ethics in the trenches.

On the other hand, you could make bizarre "double standards" claims or compare luxury travel to buying plastic Easter eggs and imaginary cookies. Right now, the Supreme Court seems content with this path.

A Federal Judge Asks: Does the Supreme Court Realize How Bad It Smells? [NY Times]

Earlier: Sam Alito Laments It's Getting So You Can't Take All-Expense Paid Luxury Vacations Funded By Billionaires Anymore
Paragon Of Virtue Clarence Thomas Has Been Given Half Million In Value Off The Record And It Totally Hasn't Impacted His Judging. Not One Bit. Nope.
Judge Ho Blows Off Clarence Thomas Taking $500K In Vacations Because Some Other Judges Own Stocks So... You Know... Something Something.
Sonia Sotomayor Ruled On Copyright Cases While Disclosing Book Fees Which Is Sort Of Like Years Of Covering Up Yacht Trips And Private School Tuition
Sonia Sotomayor Schools Conservative Supreme Court Justices On The Right Way To Respond To An Ethics Inquiry
John Roberts Gaslights Crowd With 'Commitment' To Super Secret Supreme Court Ethics Plan He Won't Talk About

Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you're interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.