v JOYCE S. ANDERSON Special to the Jewish Times There is a Code of Conduct for United States Judges, a set of “ethical principles and guidelines” adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The Code covers issues of judicial integrity and independence, judicial diligence and impartiality, permissible extra judicial activities, and the avoidance of impropriety or even its appearance. The only members of the judiciary exempted from this Code of Conduct are the nine Justices of the Supreme Court.

That may sound like an oxymoron – a strange contradiction in kind – since these men and women hold the highest positions in the judiciary system of the country. The justices hold life tenure in contrast to other judges in the federal system. When there is a conflict of interest, they are expected to recuse themselves from cases before the High Court. In recent years, there have been questions raised when certain justices did not choose recusal or where the activities of a justice appeared to cross the lines of certain portions of the Code of Conduct.

A bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in June, 2011 that would hold High Court justices to the Code of Conduct of the federal judiciary. Representative Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, the lead sponsor of the bill argues that Supreme Court Justices should be subject to the same canons of judicial ethics that apply to all other federal judges. It’s informative to review recent years and answer certain basic questions: Who are the justices whose ethics have been questioned? What have been the events or activities where ethics became an issue? Which cases before the Supreme Court have raised questions of ethics?

Two justices appear to be connected most often to questions of ethics: Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Both justices have taken part in the twice yearly closed meetings of the Koch brothers, David and Charles, who invite leading conservatives “to review strategies for combating the multitude of public policies that threaten to destroy America as we know it.” These meetings differ from other think tanks like the Aspen ideas festival that are open discussions with wide media coverage. The Koch emphasis is strictly political and involves pledges of mega dollars to support the conservative and libertarian positions of the two brothers. They were heavy contributors to the 2010 midterm election and will continue their funding for the 2012 presidential election.

There is no question that Koch Industries and all large corporations in this country were thrilled when the Supreme Court ruled in their favor with the landmark Citizens United decision in the 2010 term. Questions were raised at the time the case had been heard about the participation of Justices Scalia and Thomas because of their attendance at the Koch meetings. However, only a justice can decide about recusal. Both men were part of the 5-4 majority ruling. Citizens United held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited because of the First Amendment. This struck down a critical provision of the McCain-Feingold Act that prohibited all corporations, both for-profit and non-profit and unions from broadcasting “electioneering communications” within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary. The floodgates of corporate dollars were unleashed.

Justice Scalia on January 24 accepted the invitation from the Tea Party Caucus to address their members in a session closed to the media that was described as a “Conservative Constitutional Seminar.” Michele Bachmann, Representative from Minnesota and head of the Caucus, said it was open to all members of Congress and called it a “bipartisan event.” She said she was starting the biweekly lecture series to help new members of Congress understand the Constitution and Declaration of Independence before they are “co-opted into the Washington system.” Members who attended the session said that Scalia suggested everyone read the Federalist Papers, “underline and dog ear them.” This would be in keeping with the Originalist interpretation of the Constitution that he favors. Scalia has been the most conservative justice since he joined the High Court in l986. Critics of his attendance said he had given credence to the Tea Party agenda and raised the appearance of impropriety.

Ethics questions aimed at Clarence Thomas center directly on money as well as his significant vote in the Citizens United case. The justice is a close friend of Harlan Crow, the multi- millionaire Dallas real estate magnate and a major contributor to conservative causes. The two men met in the mid- l990s, a few years after Thomas joined the High Court. Since that time, he has donated $175,000 to a Savannah library project dedicated to Justice Thomas, presented him with the Frederick Douglass bible valued at $ 19,000, and given $ 500,000 to Thomas’ wife Virginia to start a Tea Party related group. Over the years, Crow has hosted the justice aboard his private jet and his 161-foot yacht as well as at his Bohemian Grove retreat in California and at his Adirondacks summer estate once the home of Marjorie Merriweather Post.

The latest connection between them is the Pin Point Heritage Museum, in Pin Point Georgia, where Clarence Thomas was raised. People involved in the project say the museum is not intended to honor the justice, but that his role in the community would be part of it and the documentary film that is to accompany the exhibits. The nonbinding Code of Conduct says that judges “ should not personally participate” in raising money for charitable endeavors.” Clarence Thomas ran into Algernon Varn, whose grandfather ran a seafood cannery where Thomas’ mother worked as a crab picker. When he heard that Varn hoped to preserve the cannery, he said, “I’ve got a friend I’m going to put you in touch with.” To date, Harlan Crow has invested millions of dollars in the museum. This does not have to be listed by Justice Thomas as a personal gift in his annual financial disclosure. Algernon Varn says of Clarence Thomas, “ He was instrumental in getting the process started, because he wanted it preserved to show that no matter where you come from, you can go where you want. It’s a great American story.”

Joyce S. Anderson is the author of “Courage in High Heels,” “Flaw in the Tapestry,” “If Winter Comes,” “The Mermaids Singing” and her new book, “The Critical Eye.” She can be reached at JSAWrite@aol.com.