A new "code of conduct" issued for the U.S. Supreme Court in response to growing pressure from Senate Judiciary Democrats will do nothing to save its "tattered reputation," a columnist wrote Tuesday.
The new guidelines include two new canons that are apparently in response to reports regarding private trips taken by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas that were paid for by others. There were also reports of SCOTUS staff members being used to promote Justice Sonia Sotomayor's book to colleges and libraries.
But according to The Washington Post's Ruth Marcus, the new rules are "belated, grudging and inadequate to the task of restoring the court’s tattered reputation."
"It’s difficult, maybe even impossible, to legislate good judgment or prevent the culture of ingrained entitlement that these episodes expose," Marcus writes. "No code of conduct can substitute for common sense and a basic understanding of how unseemly these episodes appear to a public that believes justices shouldn’t profit from their lofty positions or scoop up goodies not available to ordinary mortals."
Also read: GOP candidate says Trump puts allegiance to him above winning elections: new book
One problem with the new rules, Marcus writes, is that there's no mechanism in place to enforce them.
"Lacking that, there is every reason to believe that this behavior will persist, that spotty and reluctant compliance with ethics and disclosure rules will continue, and that the court’s reputation will suffer accordingly."
Marcus acknowledged that the Court's need for independence makes the enforcement of accountability tricky, so she suggests a "panel of judges, perhaps retired jurists, who could examine ethics complaints and issues of compliance."
Read the full op-ed at The Washington Post.
