In 2023 Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch were criticized after news articles revealed they had personal financial transactions with people who had interest in court decisions. Politico reported that Justice Gorsuch sold a vacation property to the CEO of a prominent law firm which often brings cases before the court. ProPublica that a Texas oil executive had purchased multiple properties from Justice Thomas which the justice did not disclose. The Supreme Court sets its own ethics rules and leaves justices to make their own decisions about when and how to report outside gifts and income.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Voting for candidate:
@B273GXVLibertarian 3mos3MO
No but there should be more transparency and disclose any transactions with any individual or group with a vested interest
@83BYVHGIndependent 4mos4MO
No, but they should be required to disclose all transactions, and recuse themselves from trials were they could be biased.
@JcawolfsonIndependent 5mos5MO
Yes, judges have an obligation to be fair and impartial, and allowance of financial transactions with parties involved with/in a specific case would be detrimental to the right to a fair trial
@6KDPPC7 6mos6MO
When members of Congress are no longer allowed to engage in insider trading then we can talk about the SCOTUS...
@6VKHGXVIndependent 2yrs2Y
Yes, but only for transactions over a certain amount.
So long as all transactions are publicly released, you should be allowed to make whatever financial deals you’re striving to achieve
@9SNLJJH 7mos7MO
No, not until Congress and all executive level civil servants have any investments placed in a blind trust.
@9HYB43NRepublican 1yr1Y
Supreme Court justices should be held to the same standard as other professions when it comes to conflicts of interest.
@DrEagleTalonCommunist 1yr1Y
Yes, Supreme Court justices should not be allowed to make financial transactions outside what is needed in day-to-day life, otherwise don’t become a Supreme Court justice.
@8VGYZK8 2yrs2Y
No, they should recuse themselves in those instances.
@MJStevens94Republican2yrs2Y
If such Supreme Court justices make such transactions with such people, that can be grounds for Congress to impeach that Supreme Court justice.
@83R5NXK2yrs2Y
Yes, and there should be a consequence for hiding transactions
@9BY452J2yrs2Y
@9BVFLBX2yrs2Y
Yes, and require any and all Supreme Court justices with any perceived conflict of interest in a case to recuse themselves
@9BST43M2yrs2Y
No, but all transactions should be reported publicly
@9BYXJZR2yrs2Y
No, as "financial transactions" is a bit broad. If there is reasonable doubt that the transaction is in an effort to influence the decisions of the court, both the sender and receiver should be investigated for that, but when it comes to just buying someone a drink on the side, who cares.
@MJStevens94Republican2yrs2Y
If such Supreme Court justice is found by evidence to be taken bribes or made financial transactions with people invested in the outcome of Court decisions, that could be grounds for corruption, and that justice can be impeached, if need be, removed from office.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
