Clarence Thomas report spurs new calls from Democrats for Supreme Court code of ethics

The recent report on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has sparked new calls from Democrats for a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. The report, which was released by the non-profit organization Fix the Court, revealed that Justice Thomas had failed to disclose his wife's income from conservative organizations on his financial disclosure forms for over a decade. This revelation has raised concerns about the impartiality and transparency of the Supreme Court, and has led many Democrats to call for a code of ethics that would require justices to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Currently, there is no formal code of ethics for the Supreme Court. While the Code of Conduct for United States Judges applies to lower court judges, it does not apply to Supreme Court justices. This has led to criticism that the Supreme Court operates in a "judicial ethics vacuum." In response to the report on Justice Thomas, several Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require Supreme Court justices to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including financial ties to outside organizations. The legislation would also establish a code of ethics for the Supreme Court, similar to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. Supporters of the legislation argue that a code of ethics would help to ensure that the Supreme Court operates with transparency and impartiality. They also point out that many other professions, including lawyers and doctors, have codes of ethics that govern their behavior. Opponents of the legislation argue that a code of ethics would be unnecessary, as Supreme Court justices are already bound by the Constitution and the law. They also argue that a code of ethics could be used to unfairly target certain justices or to limit their freedom of speech. Despite the debate, it is clear that the issue of a code of ethics for the Supreme Court is not going away anytime soon. With the recent report on Justice Thomas and the ongoing debate over the role of money in politics, it is likely that we will continue to hear calls for greater transparency and accountability from the highest court in the land.