On Monday, the American Bar Association’s policymaking body, the House of Delegates, passed a resolution calling for the Supreme Court to adopt a binding code of judicial ethics, similar to the code that governs all other federal judges.

Currently, the Supreme Court justices are the only judges in the country not bound by a code of ethical conduct. The resolution adopted on Monday reads: “This absence potentially imperils the legitimacy of all American courts and the American judicial system.”

Over the past year, Justices Clarence Thomas and John Roberts have faced public scrutiny for alleged ethical violations. However, the resolution passed by the American Bar Association clarifies that “this Resolution is not grounded upon . . . any particular conduct by any one or more current or former members of the Court.”

Last year, Democratic congress members introduced a bill that would require the Supreme Court to adopt a binding ethics code, but it has not been passed. The justices have reportedly discussed adopting an ethics code for at least the last four years but have yet to reach an agreement.

The North Carolina Supreme Court, which flipped from a 4–3 Democratic majority to a 5–2 Republican majority in January because of the midterms, announced last week that it will rehear two cases that were decided by the high court last year, saying that the “opinion[s] may be erroneous.”

The two cases are Harper v. Hall, in which the court overturned a congressional map drawn by the state’s Republican-majority legislature as a partisan gerrymander, and Holmes v. Moore, in which the court overturned a voter ID law after finding that it violated the state constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.

In the last 30 years, the North Carolina Supreme Court has only granted 2 of 214 petitions for rehearing. In her dissent, Justice Anita Earls wrote, “Going down this path is a radical departure from the way this court has operated, and these orders represent a rejection of the guardrails that have historically protected the legitimacy of the court.”

Last week, the Republican Party of Wisconsin filed a judicial conduct complaint against Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Janet Protasiewicz, citing her statements about redistricting and abortion while campaigning for an open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

At a candidate forum, Protasiewicz responded to a question about a recent Wisconsin Supreme Court decision addressing legislative redistricting by saying, “Let’s be clear here. The maps are rigged.” She has also made statements including the phrase “women’s right to choose.” The complaint alleges these statements violate Wisconsin’s code of judicial conduct, which prohibits judicial candidates from making “pledges, promises, or commitments” about issues that are likely to come before the court.

A spokesperson for Protasiewicz’s campaign responded, “This is a partisan, politically-motivated complaint that’s not based in reality or facts, much like the decisions Wisconsinites have come to expect by the right-wingers on the state Supreme Court.”

Protasiewicz is one of four candidates running for one open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The two candidates who receive the most votes in the state’s nonpartisan primary on February 21 will advance to the April 4 general election, the outcome of which will decide the ideological balance of the court.