In recent months, ethical concerns have emerged surrounding U.S. Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who have reportedly engaged in activities that some perceive as breaching ethical norms. Justice Alito faced criticism for receiving a knighthood, an action that could be seen as contradictory to the constitutional principles established by the Founding Fathers. Justice Thomas has also been in the spotlight for not disclosing certain vacations, raising questions about transparency and accountability among those holding high judicial positions. These developments are viewed as a departure from traditional Anglo-American legal values, which both justices have previously championed.
The historical context of judicial ethics shows a contrast to the current situation. In 1667, John Kelynge, who served as the Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, confronted multiple misconduct allegations, including the inappropriate use of derogatory language pertaining to key legal documents. This highlights a time when even prominent legal figures were held accountable for their ethical conduct, underscoring a legacy of maintaining integrity within the judiciary.
The need for a firm ethical framework within the judiciary has been emphasized by legal experts, such as Professor Orin Kerr, who identified historical precedents where ethical standards were enforced. The concept of “good behaviour” as part of judicial conduct has been pivotal, reflecting what some might call the “original public meaning” of this principle. These discussions shed light on why there is a call to revisit and reinforce ethics codes to preserve the integrity of high courts.