How to Judge the Judges?

In 2024, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas came under scrutiny when estimates revealed he accepted gifts valued at around $2.4 million total over the course of two decades, many of which were undisclosed. In comparison, the estimates for the Court’s other justices were around $248,000 combined, a fraction of the amounts received by Justice Thomas. Since 1973, the lower federal courts have had a Judges' Code of Conduct centered around five principles judges should abide by, as well as some contemplation of repercussions for unethical actions, such as disqualification from cases or temporary bans on judging. However, this code of conduct did not apply to the Supreme Court, which operated with scattered requirements relating to recusal from cases and disclosures of gifts from federal statutes and Congress. The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act was introduced in September of 2023 (and later again in 2025), but was not adopted. The goal of the act was to create not only a code of conduct for justices and a more detailed disclosure standard, but also systems for filing complaints against judges and conducting procedural investigations into judge conduct. Months later, the Supreme Court adopted a code of conduct in 2023, which only provides a set of five canons to abide by, without any practical system for enforcement or evaluation. The discussion around the Supreme Court and judicial ethics bears a complicated question of how to enforce ethical conduct within the nation’s judiciary branch.

Federal judges are primarily held accountable through impeachment and conviction by Congress, where the House of Representatives votes to impeach a judge and the Senate determines if removal is acceptable. The Constitution bases the validation of judges’ officeholding on their “good behaviour” and allows all government officials to be impeached and removed for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” However, actual impeachment cases of judges are relatively low and almost exclusive to extreme violations, such as crime or major falsifications. Only 15 federal judges have been impeached since 1803, and state judges follow a similar trend. The current toolkit for holding judges accountable, whether federal or state, is certainly limited.

The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025 introduces an overseeing body to enforce the code of ethics applied to the Supreme Court: a panel of five randomly-selected judges from the pool of chief judges from all the circuits. Upon receiving a complaint, this judicial investigation panel will be assembled to review the evidence and create recommended actions for the Supreme Court, which can include disciplinary action or modification of Supreme Court rules.

While the recently proposed Transparency Act of 2025 poses contention around its feasibility and constitutionality, it could solve many of the issues surrounding judicial ethics. The act itself, written by Congress, would create rules and enforcement procedures for the Supreme Court, which could disrupt the separation of powers and consolidate Congressional influence over the court. However, the act gives room for the Supreme Court to create and modify the code of conduct, and codes of conduct exist among all the lower courts. Creating more thorough guidelines would force Supreme Court judges to act with more transparency and be held accountable for their actions, consequences that still align with the Constitution: Judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.” Additionally, the creation of a judicial investigation panel could create complications for the court, as individuals can file complaints against Supreme Court judges for allegedly violating the code of conduct. While the creation of a judicial investigation panel for the Supreme Court would add a layer of security for holding judges accountable and encourage judges to observe ethical behavior, it is also possible that such a process and the threat of punishment could result in more outside influence and pressure on judges. However, the Act restricts complaints that are “repetitive, harassing, or frivolous,” allowing some defense from unfair complaints, and the judicial investigation panel would be composed of randomly chosen federal judges, allowing for more impartiality. Overall, the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025 could significantly alter the ethicality of the Supreme Court, allowing for a more transparent and moral bench, without violating the balance of powers intended by our Constitution.