WASHINGTON — The federal courts will not refer allegations that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas may have violated ethics laws to the Justice Department, the judiciary's policymaking body said.
Thomas agreed to follow updated requirements on reporting trips and gifts, including clearer guidelines on hospitality from friends, the U.S. Judicial Conference wrote Thursday to Democratic senators who called for an investigation into undisclosed acceptance of luxury trips.
Thomas previously said he wasn't required to disclose the many trips he and his wife took that were paid for by wealthy benefactors like Republican megadonor Harlan Crow because they are close personal friends.
The court didn't immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday night.
The Supreme Court adopted its first code of ethics in 2023 in the face of sustained criticism, though the new code still lacks a means of enforcement.
People are also reading…
It's unclear whether the law allows the U.S. Judicial Conference to make a criminal referral regarding a Supreme Court justice, U.S. District Judge Robert Conrad wrote. He serves as secretary for the conference, which sets policy for the federal court system and is led by Chief Justice John Roberts.
A referral in this case isn't necessary, Conrad said, because two Democratic senators called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel over the summer. No such appointment has been publicly made.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said the judiciary appears to be "shirking its statutory duty to hold a Supreme Court justice accountable for ethics violations.â€
The group Fix the Court said the financial disclosure law is clear and should apply to justices. "The Conference's letters further underscore the need for Congress to create a new and transparent mechanism to investigate the justices for ethics violations since the Conference is unwilling to act upon the one method we had presumed existed to do that," Executive Director Gabe Roth said in a statement.
Conrad also sent a similar response to a separate complaint from a conservative legal group, the Center for Renewing America, in regard to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's reports on the source of her husband's consulting income. Jackson since amended her disclosures and also agreed to updated reporting requirements, Conrad wrote.
A spokesperson for the group, Rachel Cauley, said it was a “sad commentary†that the liberal justice's omission would not have been noticed and corrected without their complaint.
Notable Supreme Court cases of 2024
Review key cases decided by the United States Supreme Court in 2024.
Both laws aimed to address conservative complaints that the social media companies were liberal-leaning and censored users based on their viewpoints, especially on the political right.
Supreme Court makes it harder to charge Capitol riot defendants with obstruction, charge Trump faces
Roughly 170 Capitol insurrection defendants have been convicted of obstructing or conspiring to obstruct the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress, including the leaders of two far-right extremist groups.Â
The current high court, with a 6-3 conservative majority, has been increasingly skeptical of the powers of federal agencies.Â
The case is the most significant to come before the high court in decades on the issue and comes as a rising number of people in the U.S. are without a permanent place to live.
The high court had put the settlement on hold last summer, in response to objections from the Biden administration.
The ruling came after a day an opinion was briefly posted on the court's website accidently and quickly taken down, but not before it was obtained by Bloomberg News.
The justices ruled that people accused of fraud by the SEC, which regulates securities markets, have the right to a jury trial in federal court.
The Supreme Court is putting the Environmental Protection Agency’s air pollution-fighting “good neighbor†plan on hold while legal challenges continue, the conservative-led court’s latest blow to federal regulations.
The justices ruled in favor of a 1994 ban on firearms for people under restraining orders to stay away from their spouses or partners.
The high court found 6-3 that the Trump administration did not follow federal law when it reversed course and banned bump stocks.
The Supreme Court has preserved access to a medication that was used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S. last year.Â
The unanimous opinion reverses a lower court decision tossing out the gun rights group’s lawsuit against ex-New York State Department of Financial Services Ssuperintendent Maria Vullo.
The Supreme Court has preserved a Republican-held South Carolina congressional district, rejecting a lower-court ruling the district discriminated against Black voters.
The Supreme Court has rejected a conservative-led attack that could've undermined the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.Â
The Supreme Court on Monday restored Donald Trump to 2024 presidential primary ballots, rejecting state attempts to hold the Republican former president accountable for the Capitol riot.
