Supreme Court Justices Discuss Ethics Code, Televised Cases In Rare Congressional Testimony

Chief Justice John Roberts is considering whether the Supreme Court should adopt its own ethics code.

The justices in practice follow a set of rules, but there is no institutionalized process that binds the Court.

The justices also discussed televising their proceedings and President Donald Trump’s quarrelsome relationship with the judiciary.

Chief Justice John Roberts is considering whether the Supreme Court should adopt its own ethics code, Justice Elena Kagan said Thursday.

Kagan, who testified before a House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government Thursday afternoon with Justice Samuel Alito, made the disclosure in response to questions about sexual misconduct in the judiciary.

Alito and Kagan sit on the high court’s budget committee, and a congressional appropriation for the Court’s business was the official reason for their testimony. Thursday’s hearing was the first such proceeding since 2015.

Though the Supreme Court justices follow the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, they are not formally bound by it. As such, there is no existing mechanism to investigate or discipline a sitting justice for ethical infractions. For example, a deluge of misconduct complaints were filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit during Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s contentious confirmation, but they were dismissed in December 2018 in view of his elevation to the high court.

Alito told the panel that applying the Code of Conduct against the high court raises thorny constitutional issues. On the other hand, a set of rules promulgated by the Court itself could be less problematic.

Elsewhere in the hearing, Alito and Kagan shared their opposition to filming the Supreme Court’s proceedings. Current practice provides that a transcript of arguments is released on the same day as the proceeding, while an audio recording of the argument is released at the end of the week.

The justices have consistently resisted placing cameras in the court — said Justice David Souter of that subject in 1996: “The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, it’s going to roll over my dead body.”

Alito said he supported efforts to make the high court’s proceedings more accessible to the public, consistent with their ability to decide cases effectively. As a circuit court judge, he voted in favor of introducing cameras to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. However, his thinking changed after his confirmation to the Supreme Court.

“I came to see that allowing the arguments to be televised would undermine their value to us as a step in the decision-making process,” Alito told the panel.

Kagan expounded on that point, saying that oral argument is especially useful because it gives the justices a chance to engage in a free, searching, and sometimes colorful analysis of the case before them. Were cameras introduced, Kagan said, the justices might begin to censor themselves and avoid questions the public could perceive as strange or inappropriate.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/07/supreme-court-ethics-code-kagan/