Ethical standards

If it is true that Chief Justice John Roberts’ wife made more than $10 million as a consultant to elite law firms, I can understand why he has refused to testify in Congress over the recent Supreme Court ethics scandals. As a recruiter who placed attorneys in law firms, some of which have argued cases before the Supreme Court, could her remarkable success come because of her spouse’s position? Her income was listed as “salary” on the chief justice’s financial disclosure forms although her income did not come from a single employer as the word “salary” suggests.

Earlier in April, ProPublica released a report documenting decades of undisclosed lavish gifts Justice Clarence Thomas and his family received from Republican mega-donor Harlan Crow. To make matters worse, Thomas failed to report his wife’s nearly $700,000 in earnings from the archconservative Heritage Foundation. Between 2003 and 2007, he simply listed her income as “none,” in clear violation of his obligation to disclose the source of spousal income.

Then there’s Justice Neil Gorsuch who sold property to the head of a powerful law firm that has repeatedly had business before the court without identifying the identity of the purchaser. The firm has been involved in 22 cases before or presented to the Supreme Court. Gorsuch has recorded an opinion in 12 of those cases, having sided with the firm’s clients in eight of them.

We should expect the justices of the Supreme Court to abide by the highest ethical standards. Remove the blindfold from Lady Justice.

— Tazewell Hubard, Norfolk