The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Opinion At the Supreme Court, our code of conduct is … don’t worry about it

Columnist|
April 28, 2023 at 9:45 a.m. EDT
The Supreme Court building in 2022. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)
4 min

Hi! We’re the highest court in the land, with the fate of millions of people in our hands all the time, at least in the parts of our hands that are not already holding big bags of money from unspecified sources. Hmmm. Sorry, let us start over.

Hi, we’re the highest court in the land, and we don’t want you to worry that we have let that lofty post get to our heads! Of course we don’t think of ourselves as above the law! It’s just, if we decide something isn’t the law, it stops being law, so in that sense, we are kind of above it? Sorry, hang on. Let us start again.

Hi, we’re the highest court in the land! We keep hearing people complain about our lack of ethics code. Well, the good news is: We have a code of ethics! And it is … don’t worry about it! We have read other ethics codes that bind other judges, and we love the spirit of those codes! Are we bound by them? Shush.

Ruth Marcus: A terrible silence from the Supreme Court, where ethics have gone awry

Hey, you know who had a code? Hammurabi! And that didn’t make people happier with him, just more annoyed about how he wanted them to lose their hands.

We know that a lot of people are looking at the court and saying, “Should they do that?” and “Don’t they have to tell us if they do that?” and “All I ask is that before you rule on whether I get to keep autonomy over my body, you tell me if you have spent your free time hanging out with a Nazi tea kettle! I’m not even saying you need to stop fraternizing with Evil Mrs. Potts, only that you disclose and recuse appropriately!” Or, you know, things of that nature. This makes us feel like you think we are maybe not above criticism.

Alexandra Petri: Every second on the yacht I wished I were in a Walmart parking lot

So to please you people, we’ve been looking into having a code of conduct. We looked so hard but ultimately found that … we did not want to. Maybe the real ethics code is in our hearts. Maybe an ethics code is more of a journey than a destination. Not the kind of journey we would need to disclose, the other kind.

The Post's View: Justice Clarence Thomas luxury vacations are proof that the Supreme Court needs ethics reform

Besides, you have so much to worry about right now. Things like, “Where are my rights going? Why is child labor coming back? Can I provide lifesaving medical care without being sued out of practice?” You don’t also need to worry that the Supreme Court does not have a code of ethics. We have something even better, which is a commitment to being the most Supreme Court that there is! If we had an ethics code, people might be able to plan around it; under the current system, whether we rule on cases or recuse is a surprise. Everyone loves surprises!

Where should you go if you have a complaint? Look, we’re the Supreme Court. We don’t anticipate that you’re going to have a complaint.

Justice Clarence Thomas has for years claimed income from a defunct real estate firm

You do? Ugh. This is so frustrating. Every day it seems as though people are very mad at us! Frankly, you should be annoyed at those people who say our legitimacy is eroding. If they weren’t complaining, everything would be fine. They should stop grousing and be grateful for what they have: nine wonderful justices who work even harder than judges on lower courts, who are always recusing themselves for “conflicts” or doing things like “filing disclosure forms.” We, by contrast, show up every day, to every case, no matter how many people tell us not to! That’s the work ethic we have! And that work ethic is more important than the other kind of ethic, which would just be used to confine us and prevent us from ruling on things that we want to rule on!

Besides, a bunch of these demands for ethics standards come from Congress, which really should know better. We’re the Supreme Court, after all. We can’t be in a position where our prerogatives could be suddenly curtailed by somebody else who didn’t like that we were living our lives in accordance with our own lights. That’s no way to live — thinking you are free to do something, and then suddenly being told you aren’t! No, not for us. For some people, maybe, but not for us.