Start with the proposition that a purely voluntary “ethics code” with no means of inquiry or enforcement is just a wall decoration.

Move on to the proposition nemo judex in sua causa (so old it’s in Latin) that you shouldn’t get to judge yourself.

Now look at the feckless approach of the Supreme Court.  When they’re outraged that Alito draft opinion leaked, there’s an investigation declared.

When Thomas says he knew nothing of his wife’s insurrection work — a fact that lends itself to investigation — no inquiry made.

Now he absolutely knows of his wife’s insurrection work because we all do — and yet he still doesn’t recuse.  No explanation; no investigation.

Now this.  The Court’s ‘wall-decoration‘ ethics code, selective ad hoc investigation, and “nemo” accountability is going to be sorely tested.  nytimes.com/2022/11/19/us/…

The first step to recovery is to admit you have a problem.  At SCOTUS, the problems run deep.

Here’s a letter I sent Roberts asking for inquiries and answers about this group’s wining and dining of selected justices.

Here’s his response.  Tellingly, it notes the existence of the wall-decoration code, but is not responsive to my letter and shows no sign of inquiry or interest in what went on.

NYT says letter went to Chief Justice in June informing him about leak of Hobby Lobby result. What do you think?
a) Roberts launched sincere inquiry into facts of situation using standard investigative methods.
b) This was swept under increasingly lumpy-bumpy SCOTUS scandal rug.