Hi,
Another day, another damning revelation about the U.S. Supreme Court’s
utter lack of ethics.
The New York Times has just revealed that Chief Justice John Roberts’s
wife has been getting paid millions of dollars by corporations with cases
before the court.^1
Exactly how much, and from whom? We don’t know, because the chief justice
hasn’t disclosed a thing about the many high-powered law firms his wife
has worked for as a recruiter. And because there’s no code of ethics
requiring him to do so, he can get away with it.
[ [link removed] ]This is just the latest ethics scandal to prove that the U.S. Supreme
Court cannot be trusted to police itself. Will you donate today to Demand
Progress Action to help power our work, including urging Congress to pass
the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act?
[ [link removed] ]Donate $10
[ [link removed] ]Donate $20
[ [link removed] ]Donate $40
[ [link removed] ]Or, donate another amount
The latest story comes on the heels of another bombshell investigation
from the Times, detailing how a little-known charity connected to the
court called the Supreme Court Historical Society has been raising
millions from right-wing special interests that had major cases before the
justices.
Of the nearly $11 million in donations the paper could trace, a whopping
60% came from parties who regularly do business before the court. None of
it was disclosed to the public.
A sampling: Chevron gave $190,000 while the body considered major climate
change cases. UPS gave more than half a million as the justices were
considering a pregnancy discrimination suit against the company. A
corporate lawyer who advocated on behalf of Purdue Pharma, the notorious
manufacturers of OxyContin, gave $187,500.^2
Now we learn from a complaint obtained by The New York Times that lawyers
who argued cases before the Supreme Court were potentially making
six-figure payments to the chief justice’s household.
It all sounds incredibly shady. Some of it might not be. But there’s no
way for us to evaluate whether this violates ethics rules, because there
are no rules.
The nine justices of the Supreme Court are appointed for life, and despite
their virtually unchecked power, there are no policies regarding when they
must recuse themselves or even reveal potential conflicts of interest.^3
At a time when the Supreme Court is in the process of gutting decades of
precedent on voting rights, abortion rights, civil rights, and countless
other major issues affecting Americans' lives, Congress must finally act
and impose a code of ethics on the justices.
[ [link removed] ]Will you donate $10 today to help urge Congress to pass a
code of ethics for the Supreme Court, and push for other key reforms?
With gratitude for all that you do,
Tihi and the team at Demand Progress Action
[ [link removed] ]DONATE
Sources:
1. The New York Times, "At the Supreme Court, Ethics Questions Over a
Spouse’s Business Ties," [ [link removed] ]January 31, 2023.
2. The New York Times, "A Charity Tied to the Supreme Court Offers Donors
Access to the Justices," [ [link removed] ]January 1, 2023.
3. Brennan Center for Justice, "Brennan Center Urges Supreme Court
Justices to Adopt a Code of Ethics," [ [link removed] ]September 24, 2019.
----------
PAID FOR BY DEMAND PROGRESS (<a href="[link removed]">DemandProgress.org</a>) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Join our online community on <b><a href="[link removed]">Facebook</a></b> or <b><a href="[link removed]">Twitter</a>.</b>
You can unsubscribe from this list at any time: [link removed]
