US Supreme Court justices, judges face new rules for disclosing free trips
Source: Reuters
March 18, 2024 4:28 PM EDT
March 18 (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices and federal judges can no longer avoid disclosing the value of travel-related gifts they receive by classifying such free trips as "reimbursements" on their financial disclosure forms under new regulations now in effect.
The regulations, announced by the federal judiciary late on Friday, follow revelations that conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas had not disclosed luxury trips paid for by a wealthy benefactor.
Following media reports on those trips, Thomas in August filed a delayed 2022 financial disclosure report listing private jet trips provided by Texas businessman Harlan Crow to or from Dallas for conferences in February and May of that year and to a property in upstate New York's Adirondack Mountains last July.
Thomas listed the flight to the Adirondacks by private plane as well as related lodging, food and entertainment as "reimbursements" and not as a "gift" from Crow whose value would need to be disclosed.
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-justices-judges-face-new-rules-disclosing-free-trips-2024-03-18/
Irish_Dem
(47,058 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,979 posts)and can refer to DOJ if needed.
TheRickles
(2,063 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,058 posts)Will the SC justices abide by the new rules?
We shall see how this all works out.
BumRushDaShow
(128,979 posts)shot someone on 5th Avenue they would.
Usually with anything dealing with "discipline" in the federal government, there is an increasing escalation of meting that out - e.g., "verbal warning", "written warning", etc. I expect for the SCOTUS, Roberts would be the starting point for that.
Irish_Dem
(47,058 posts)They have life appointments. They feel untouchable.
Maybe they are.
As I say it will be interesting to watch this unfold.
BumRushDaShow
(128,979 posts)to uncover any subterfuge.
Irish_Dem
(47,058 posts)AllaN01Bear
(18,216 posts)live love laugh
(13,109 posts)ThoughtCriminal
(14,047 posts)Disclosure or not, without consequences, the corruption continues.
sinkingfeeling
(51,457 posts)aggiesal
(8,914 posts)As sure as I'm sitting here, they will not give up, not reporting their luxury vacation through some undisclosed loophole.
crickets
(25,980 posts)There would be no question about breach of ethics if they would just, ya know, not accept any gifts.
RobinA
(9,893 posts)I came to say. Why are Supreme Court justices accepting ANY gifts, let alone free trips? Your average Fed employee is VERY limited in what they can accept. Like, $20 value. Which is as it should be. I can't imagine how any gift to any judge, not just SC, is not the definition of the "appearance of impropriety.
Emile
(22,741 posts)trip on a private yacht and they don't have to report it.
Happy Hoosier
(7,308 posts)They just have to be transparent about it.