The recent revelation of Supreme Court Justices skirting reporting norms concerning special interest-funded trips has raised eyebrows in more than one quarter. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have been cited as examples of those failing to disclose these dispensations appropriately, with the rationale being that the Supreme Court lacks an enforceable code of ethics.
NPR has comprehensively reported on this issue and, it seems, Supreme Court Justices are not the only ones taking such liberties. Apparently, several other federal judges have also been steering clear of their obligations to report gifts.
Dozens of federal judges failed to fully disclose free luxury travel to judicial conferences around the world, leaving the public in the dark about potential conflicts of interest among some of the United States’ top legal officials. Federal Judges, occasionally with family members or even their pet in tow, savored week-long seminars in luxury resorts located in places ranging from London and Palm Beach, Fla to Bar Harbor, Maine, and outskirts of Yellowstone National Park. These judges enjoyed free rooms, free meals, and free travel money which collectively amounted to a few thousand dollars.
Although the totals might pale in comparison to Justice Alito’s six-figure fishing trips or Justice Thomas’s millions in undisclosed funds, the scrutiny should be the same. The lack of disclosure highlights an apparent disregard for the principle of avoiding even the appearance of impropriety.
In nearly 40 instances, Judges attended events at luxury resorts but failed to properly file a report within 30 days. These reports were uploaded months or even years late, and only after NPR started probing. In 13 cases, NPR found judges had not declared the benefits they received on their annual financial disclosure forms. – NPR
Given this disregard for disclosure, coupled with instances of judges ruling on cases in which they have a financial interest, it seems prudent to create stricter regulation of the judiciary. The oft-quoted adage, “one bad apple can spoil the barrel,” seems fitting here. The gravitas of the black robe is inevitably diminished when judges fail to adhere to rules made to keep justice impartial and untainted.