Page:Roberts Letter to Durbin.pdf/2



The undersigned Justices today reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States. This statement aims to provide new clarity to the bar and to the public on how the Justices address certain recurring issues, and also seeks to dispel some common misconceptions.

The Justices, like other federal judges, consult a wide variety of authorities to address specific ethical issues. They may turn to judicial opinions, treatises, scholarly articles, disciplinary decisions, and the historical practice of the Court and the federal judiciary. They may also seek advice from the Court’s Legal Office and from their colleagues.

In 1922, Congress instituted the Judicial Conference of the United States as an instrument to manage the lower federal courts. The Judicial Conference, which binds lower courts, does not supervise the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, for a century, the Conference has contributed to the development of a body of ethical rules and practices—including through the lower court Code of Conduct—which are of significant importance to the Justices.

As the Commentary to Canon 1 of the lower court code states, its provisions are “designed to provide guidance to judges and nominees for judicial office.” Many of its aspirational provisions “are necessarily cast in general terms, and judges may reasonably differ in their interpretation.” The canons themselves are broadly worded principles that inform ethical conduct and practices. But they are not themselves rules. They are far too general to be used in that manner. Still, the canons and the Judicial Conference’s Code of Conduct as a whole provide guidance to the federal judiciary.

In 1991, Members of the Court voluntarily adopted a resolution to follow the substance of the Judicial Conference Regulations. Since then Justices have followed the financial disclosure requirements and limitations on gifts, outside earned income, outside employment, and honoraria. They file the same annual financial disclosure reports as other federal judges. Those reports disclose, among other things, the Justices’ non-governmental income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements from third parties. For purposes of sound administration, the Justices, like lower court judges, file those reports through the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Financial Disclosure. That Committee reviews the information contained in these reports and either finds them to be in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or sends a letter of inquiry if additional information is needed to make that determination. More generally, the Committee provides guidance on the sometimes complex reporting requirements. Just last month, for example, it provided clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exemption to the disclosure rules. Allegations of errors or omissions in the filing of financial disclosure reports are referred by the Secretary of the Judicial Conference to the Committee on Financial Disclosure. The Committee may send the filer a letter of inquiry, providing an opportunity for the filer to respond as appropriate.

In regard to the financial disclosure requirements relating to teaching and outside earned income, the Justices may not accept compensation for an appearance or a speech, but may be paid for “teaching a course of study at an accredited educational institution or participating in an educational program of any duration that is sponsored by such an institution and is part of its educational offering.” Outside Earned Income Regs. § 1020.35 (b). As the Commentary to Canon 4 of the lower court code observes, “As a judicial officer and a person specially learned in the law,