Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a Harvard-educated lawyer and one of the most outspoken critics of the current Supreme Court’s ethics crisis, is going after emoluments in new legislation designed to rein in the SCOTUS excesses. With Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Raskin is getting specific about what should constitute a “gift” to a Supreme Court Justice — and the two congress members are using a model with which they are familiar: the Congressional model.
Raskin writes that the “High Court Gift Ban Act will stop Supreme Court justices from taking personal gifts worth more than $50.” It’s not a figure the congress members are pulling out of thin air, Raskin adds, saying of the proposed $50 limit: “That’s our rule in Congress.” (As one commenter puts it, $50 is the “gifts, not bribes” line.)
Our High Court Gift Ban Act will stop Supreme Court justices from taking personal gifts worth more than $50. That’s our rule in Congress where lavish gifts like luxury travel and private school tuition from interested parties are bribes—not gifts.https://t.co/5eoIs4Nfo7
— Rep. Jamie Raskin (@RepRaskin) June 25, 2024
The Supreme Court, which polices itself on ethics as part of an honor system that many say is irrevocably broken, has long sustained its objection to being regulated by the other branches of government, as the Raskin/Ocasio-Cortez bill proposes doing here through Congress. The SCOTUS even holds itself apart from all the lower courts in the American judiciary system, where similar ethics rules are clear and enforceable.
The move to hold the Justices accountable stems largely from revelations that far-right moneyed interests have routinely given trips and provided accommodations for Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, allowing for the appearance — even without evidence thereof — of potential quid pro quo from the bench.
The mere perception of payment for power, even if the Justices maintain they are not influenced by the gifts they receive, is enough — critics assert — to damage the reputation of a critical U.S. institution where impartiality is essential.
“The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land but has the lowest ethical standards, which means pay-to-play billionaires, right-wing dark money groups and carbon-emitting special interests have freedom to purchase the best justice money can buy,” Raskin says in a release on the proposed bill.
“Congress can’t stand idly by as this emboldened and imperious Court pursues a lawless right-wing agenda,” Raskin asserts.
In a sort of amicus brief on behalf of the bill, Sarah Lipton-Lubet, the Take Back the Court Action Fund president, says: “We prohibit lavish gifts to pretty much everyone in the federal government, whether an intern or a senator, for obvious reasons. Why would some of the most powerful and least accountable members of our government be any different?”
The Supreme Court has insulated itself from real fact-finding, so transparency and proper investigation are foundational to rebuilding its integrity.
— Sheldon Whitehouse (@SenWhitehouse) June 24, 2024