Before 2023, Supreme Court Justices lacked a formal code of conduct governing their own ethical obligations, unlike lower federal judges. Although news broke in 2019 that the Court was working on ethics rules, nothing materialized until November 13, 2023, perhaps because of increased public scrutiny of the Justices’ ethics and financial disclosures, including a ProPublica report that detailed the flights, vacations, and personal hospitality accommodations Justice Clarence Thomas did not disclose.
The Code of Conduct for Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States contains five canons of ethical guidance.
The Code of Conduct matched many of the rules that applied to other federal judges, but questions were raised about how effective it could be while lacking an enforcement mechanism. Could the new set of ethics really make a difference, or would it prove as toothless as some feared?
Thanks to a spreadsheet created by Fix the Courts that tracks the annual financial disclosure reports of the Supreme Court Justices from 2014 on, one thing is easy to discern: the total value of the reported gifts accepted has sharply declined since the Code of Conduct was released. Whether it truly reflects all gifts given is unknown, but the amounts over the past year are a small fraction of what was reported in some previous years.
Fly the Friendly (and Free) Skies
As the top court in the federal judiciary, SCOTUS holds a unique position. Some of the rules that guide the lower courts, such as using replacements for recusals, can’t apply to the Justices. While all lower federal courts are subject to the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, the Act's disciplinary authority does not apply to Supreme Court Justices. While SCOTUS is subject to certain pertinent U.S. Codes on subjects like recusal, the lack of an enforcement mechanism means Justices can treat them more as suggestions than legal requirements.
The code of ethics in the Justices’ Code of Conduct uses the following canons:
- A Justice Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
- A Justice Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
- A Justice Should Perform the Duties of Office Fairly, Impartially, and Diligently
- A Justice May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities that Are Consistent with the Obligations of the Judicial Office
- A Justice Should Refrain from Political Activity
The Court said the Code was intended to gather in one place ethical principles the Justices had long treated as governing their conduct, while recognizing institutional differences between the Supreme Court and lower courts. These include the “Duty to Sit” borne by the Justices, who can’t be replaced by another jurist for a recusal due to a conflict of interest. It also declares the Justices need to “maintain and observe high standards of conduct” and that they “should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence official conduct or judgment.”
Opinions on how successful the Justices have been at meeting the tenets of these canons under Chief Justice John Roberts will likely vary based on each person’s view of the Court’s rulings, but the financial disclosure forms are much less open to interpretation. Gathered by Fix the Court, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization seeking to make all federal courts more accountable through term limits, stronger recusal and ethics laws, and increased online disclosure rules, the spreadsheet shows the estimated value of gifts that the Justices have received since 2014, the source, and where it was disclosed.
Fix the Court’s database attributes the largest estimated annual value of reported gifts to Justice Thomas in each year from 2015 through 2022, often far surpassing the combined total of all the other Justices’ disclosures. This included reporting over $750,000 in estimated gifts in 2019, most of it in the form of private-jet flights through business associates like Harlan Crow and David Sokol. After the report’s release, Justice Thomas’s gift disclosures fell to $2,249 in 2023. The database lists no reportable gifts for Justice Thomas for calendar years 2024 and 2025. That does not establish that he received no gifts, because disclosure rules include thresholds and exemptions.
Receiving gifts is not exclusive to Justice Thomas. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg received $1 million as a prize from the Berggruen Institute in 2019, but she said she would donate the award to charity. Federal judicial policy generally prohibits judicial officers from receiving honoraria, but it allows an honorarium of up to $2,000 if directed to charity. In addition, the policy doesn’t necessarily apply to competitive prizes such as the Berggruen award. She also accepted round-trip airfare from the Supreme Court of Korea in 2015, estimated at over $8,000. Aside from concert tickets in 2023, Justice Samuel Alito’s disclosed gifts have been awards and honorary degrees.
Since the release of the Code of Conduct, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has the highest reported value of gifts received. Most have taken the form of artwork for her chambers, totaling over $21,000 from 2023 to 2025.
Right, Right, the Whole Three Branches Oversight Thing
Given the incredible power Supreme Court Justices possess, the lack of real means to enforce financial disclosure laws or impose recusal may help explain why some consider the Justices’ Code of Conduct somewhat insubstantial.
Attempts have been made to address the issue through checks and balances. This includes the introduction of a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives titled “The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025.” In July 2026, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of the Senate Judiciary Committee introduced the ‘‘Supreme Court Biennial Appointments and Term Limits Act of 2026,’’ which would limit Justices to 18-year term limits, allow former Justices to fill in for recusals, and allow presidents to appoint replacement Justices twice during a term. As of this writing, neither bill has advanced to a vote.
While the Justices may not want their terms cut short or face further financial scrutiny, the grumbling for change may be getting louder. Gallup found that 61% of U.S. adults disapproved of the Court’s job performance in its July 1–19, 2026 poll, the highest disapproval rate in Gallup’s trend.
