Friends — between a sham internal investigation, new ethical questions swirling around the right-wing justices, and ongoing arguments in cases that threaten our most basic rights and freedoms, it’s been a busy few weeks for the Supreme Court.

We’re just over a month into 2023, and already the Court’s right-wing majority is picking up where it left off last year: intensifying glaring questions around its legitimacy with more reported acts of potential ethics violation, corruption, and transparency failures.

And to top it all off, just this morning we learned that the justices have discussed a potential code of ethics for at least four years, but reportedly couldn’t come to a consensus.

Whether it’s inside intel reportedly given to anti-abortion activists by Justice Alito, millions made by Justice Roberts’ wife in potential conflicts of interest, or special treatment of the justices during the Court’s internal Dobbs leak probe, ethics scandals are nothing new for the Roberts Court. But that doesn’t mean we can let it off the hook.

Clearly the Court cannot — or WILL not — police itself. So it’s up to all of us to do so. And with your help, we at Take Back the Court are leading the charge to hold these right-wing justices accountable.

Washington Post | Supreme Court justices discussed, but did not agree on code of conduct

“The Supreme Court has failed to reach consensus on an ethics code of conduct specific to the nine justices despite internal discussion dating back at least four years, according to people familiar with the matter.”

NYT | At the Supreme Court, Ethics Questions Over a Spouse’s Business Ties

“After Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. joined the Supreme Court, his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, gave up her career as a law firm partner to become a high-end legal recruiter in an effort to alleviate potential conflicts of interest. [...] Now, a former colleague of Mrs. Roberts has raised concerns that her recruiting work poses potential ethics issues for the chief justice. Seeking an inquiry, the ex-colleague has provided records to the Justice Department and Congress indicating Mrs. Roberts has been paid millions of dollars in commissions for placing lawyers at firms — some of which have business before the Supreme Court, according to a letter obtained by The New York Times.”

CNN: Exclusive: Supreme Court did not disclose financial relationship with expert brought in to review leak probe

“The Supreme Court did not disclose its longstanding financial ties with former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff even as it touted him as an expert who independently validated its investigation into who leaked the draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. [...] The estimated payments to Chertoff’s risk assessment firm, for consultations that extended over several months and involved a review of the justices’ homes, reached at least $1 million. “ [...] The court’s decision to keep secret the prior arrangements with Chertoff, whose professional path has intersected over the years with Chief Justice John Roberts and other court conservatives, as it used him for a seal of approval, adds to controversy over the leak investigation itself.”

Mother Jones | Forever Home: A Native woman fought for years to gain custody of her granddaughter. Now the case is before the Supreme Court—and could have consequences beyond child welfare.

“A child being adopted out of the tribe is no small matter, testified Alan Roy, secretary treasurer of White Earth. Not only does the child risk losing their connection to their community, but the tribe risks losing another member. When families rupture, said Roy, systemic problems emerge, from unemployment to substance use to educational challenges. ‘Everything is affected,’ he said, ‘if this child were not to have a relationship with her people. We need every child. There’s only so many of us.’”

As college tuition costs soar, millions of Americans find themselves saddled with a crushing burden: student loan debt. The Biden administration introduced a plan last year that would finally give some borrowers much-needed relief — but that help is under threat by an out-of-touch, hyper-conservative Supreme Court supermajority.

As the Court gears up to hear cases later this month that could put student loan relief in jeopardy, we analyzed the disparities between the costs of college when the nine Supreme Court justices attended and the costs at those same institutions for students today.

The results are staggering… but not surprising.

Six out-of-touch people whose elite educations cost a fraction of what tuition costs at those same institutions today should not have the final word on whether the rest of us get the help we urgently need. If we want justices who actually put our interests first, we have to expand the Court.

➤ Our full report on the cost of college when the justices attended vs.
the cost for students today

We’re sure by now you’ve seen that the Court’s sham internal investigation into last May’s leaked draft Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. opinion came up less than fruitful.

But we did learn one important thing from the Marshal’s report: the nine justices received special treatment during the investigation. Unlike the dozens of lower-ranking Court employees rigorously evaluated for potential involvement in the leak, the justices were not required to sign affidavits — nor did they have to hand over their cell phones and computers.

We think there’s much more the American people deserve to know. So we sent a letter to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees with 18 questions lawmakers should ask the Court.

If you agree that the Supreme Court is incapable of policing itself and lawmakers should step up and provide oversight instead, sign our letter calling on Congress to do its job as a co-equal branch of government and hold this corrupt Court to account.

More details are emerging about this story every day, and as part of our new Supreme Court Accountability Project, we’ll be tracking them all. Keep an eye on your inbox to stay in the loop with all the latest developments.

If you enjoyed this edition of Full Court Press, I hope you’ll consider chipping in to support our work to expand the Supreme Court to put power back where it belongs – with the people.