MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images
- Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse sent a letter to an agency demanding more information on ethics rules for federal judges.
- "Transparency is critical at all levels of government, and the courts are no exception," Whitehouse said.
- Unlike lower federal judges, Supreme Court justices are not bound by a code of conduct.
A federal judge could be invited to stay at a wealthy entrepreneur's vacation home without ever being required to disclose that trip and the value of it. It's a so-called hospitality loophole, as Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse has put it, which he's advocated to close in an effort to avoid potential conflicts of interest for federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, who make consequential decisions that shape American law and life.
"Transparency is critical at all levels of government, and the courts are no exception," the Rhode Island Democrat said in a statement. "If we don't know who's providing judges with gifts and hospitality, it becomes difficult for the public to trust that courts will treat people fairly and decide matters impartially."
In a new letter obtained by Insider, Whitehouse demanded answers on how the justices and all other federal judges disclose hospitality they receive, including gifts, food, lodging and entertainment. A longtime advocate for greater financial transparency in the federal judiciary, Whitehouse wrote to the courts' administrative agency requesting an update on the disclosure rules.
Both Democrats and Republicans have complained that the federal judiciary follows less strict financial disclosure requirements than the other branches of government and have pushed for expanded reporting rules. Currently, federal judges, who have lifetime appointments, are required under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to file financial disclosure reports annually that are available to the public upon request.
Yet Whitehouse is raising concerns about how the judges handle that disclosure when they are given a "personal hospitality" exception, covering food, lodging and entertainment.
Whitehouse is requesting further clarification from the agency on the "personal hospitality" term and inquiring about the "potential for abuse of this exemption," he wrote to the Administrative Office of the US Courts.
The letter is a follow-up to a lengthy back-and-forth in recent years between Whitehouse and the agency on the judges' ethics rules. The agency previously acknowledged in an April 2022 letter to Whitehouse that "personal hospitality" means "hospitality extended for a nonbusiness purpose by an individual, not a corporation or organization, at the personal residence of that individual or his family or on property or facilities owned by that individual or his family."
Yet Whitehouse is demanding answers on what specifically falls under the "personal hospitality" exception: what about hospitality received at a commercial property, such as a resort? What about a gift that "a third party reimburses the host for the costs" of, the senator inquired in Tuesday's letter.
"The Judicial Conference has said it would at least look at these questions, and I hope it will act to make sure that all judges—including Supreme Court justices—play by the same rules as other government officials," Whitehouse said in a statement.
A spokesperson for the Administrative Office of the US Courts declined to comment on Whitehouse's letter, referring Insider to the agency's April 2022 correspondence to the senator.
Whitehouse's request comes as the Supreme Court justices, whom unlike the lower federal judges are not bound by a code of conduct, have been under heightened scrutiny over ethics concerns.
Calls for better transparency and accountability at the Supreme Court arose after reports that Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, conservative activist Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, played a role in challenging the 2020 election results. Those calls also grew after The New York Times reported last fall that a former anti-abortion leader claimed he had advance knowledge of the outcome of a major 2014 Supreme Court contraception case, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby.
Seeking to address ethics concerns, Whitehouse along with a handful of Democrats introduced a bill earlier this month that would improve financial disclosure rules and require the creation of an enforceable code of conduct for the justices. The American Bar Association also urged the Supreme Court this month to adopt ethics rules similar to those followed by all other federal judges.
For at least the past four years, the justices have discussed adopting a code of conduct for themselves but have failed to decide on one, though the topic remains under consideration, The New York Times and Washington Post reported this month.