Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she believes there should be a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices and that it should be enforced.
Speaking at the second annual Vital Voices Festival put on by Vital Voices, an international nonprofit group co-founded by Clinton and focused on women’s rights across the globe, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee expressed her displeasure with the recent scandals surrounding the Supreme Court and called for more stringent rules to be placed on and enforced on the justices.
“Why should they be the only institution in the United States without a code of ethics that is enforceable? … And they have a lifetime appointment,” Clinton said on the panel. “So, of course, there should be ethical standards, and they should carry some weight.”
Clinton referred to the recent scandals surrounding Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as a reason the Supreme Court should institute an enforceable code of ethics for its justices.
Thomas and the Supreme Court have been under intense scrutiny since investigative outlet ProPublica revealed that Harlan Crow, a wealthy Dallas-based Republican donor, paid for Thomas to take trips and vacations, bought a property owned by Thomas’s family, and paid private school tuition for the justice’s grandnephew, who the justice raised “as a son.” Thomas didn’t disclose any of these payments, purchases, or trips.
Clinton briefly mentioned “other” justices that have had their own scandals but did not name who she was talking about.
It was recently revealed that Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Chief Justice John Roberts have had a potential conflict of interest while sitting on the bench. CNN reported that both Sotomayor and Roberts failed to recuse themselves from two separate cases before the court involving publisher Penguin Random House, with which both justices previously had lucrative book deals. The Supreme Court declined to hear both cases involving Penguin Random House and let the lower court ruling in favor of the publishing company stand.
Contrary to the two justices, former Justice Stephen Breyer, who also had a book deal with the publishing company, recused himself from both cases.
“Of course, there should be ethical standards, and they should carry some weight because [of] the daily revelations about what has gone on, particularly with Justice Thomas, but a few others as well,” Clinton said. “And they should be nonpartisan, not just bipartisan, nonpartisan. They should be a set of standards, and people should be held to them.”
The scandals surrounding the Supreme Court have led to bipartisan calls in Congress for stricter ethics laws surrounding the justices and their families.
Sens. Angus King (I-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) introduced legislation to require a new code of conduct for the justices.
“The American public’s confidence in the Supreme Court is at an all-time low. Americans have made clear their concerns with the transparency — or lack thereof — coming from the Supreme Court and its justices,” Murkowski said in a statement.
Roberts recently declined a request to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the recent scandals involving the court.
Clinton also expressed her disapproval of the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision by the Supreme Court, which overturned Roe v. Wade and found that there is no constitutional right to an abortion.
“The kind of draconian measures that are being passed in a number of states that are right out of Margaret Atwood’s Handmaid’s Tale,” Clinton said, referring to the states that have banned or limited abortion access since the Dobbs decision. “You can’t even imagine the United States in 2023 and the kind of almost punitive measures that are being put on women’s lives and choices.”
When running for president, Clinton had a number of ethical scandals herself. Most notable was the revelation that while she was secretary of state, she was using a private email server for official communications instead of using her State Department email as required by law.
The FBI found that while Clinton and members of her staff were “extremely careless” in their handling of “very sensitive, highly classified information,” they recommended “no charges” be brought against Clinton or any of her colleagues.
