Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the justices of the United States Supreme Court should make themselves subject to the existing and operative ethics guidelines set out in the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, or should promulgate their own code of conduct.

IV 116TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION H. RES. 624 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the justices of the United States Supreme Court should make themselves subject to the existing and operative ethics guidelines set out in the Code of Con- duct for United States Judges, or should promulgate their own code of conduct. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OCTOBER 8, 2019 Ms. NORTON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary RESOLUTION Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the justices of the United States Supreme Court should make themselves subject to the existing and operative ethics guidelines set out in the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, or should promulgate their own code of conduct. Whereas section 455 of title 28, United States Code, estab- lishes the circumstances under which any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself or herself from a case; Whereas under chapter 16 of title 28, United States Code (relating to complaints against judges and judicial dis- cipline), the judicial circuits may prescribe rules and pro- VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:47 Oct 08, 2019 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR624.IH HR624 pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS 2 HRES 624 IH cedures for the conduct of proceedings under that chap- ter, including regarding complaint, investigative, and re- view procedures for certain decisions of judges and mag- istrate judges of the United States not to recuse them- selves from cases; Whereas litigants can seek legal recourse through the United States courts to enforce section 455 of title 28, United States Code, and challenge the disposition of the under- lying case, and complainants have administrative proce- dures under chapter 16 of title 28, United States Code, against a judge or magistrate judge of the United States, but there are no comparable enforcement mechanisms against the justices of the United States; Whereas the Judicial Conference of the United States adopt- ed a Code of Conduct for United States Judges, which uses language identical to the relevant portion of section 455 of title 28, United States Code, that a judge or mag- istrate judge of the United States must abide by when deciding whether to recuse himself or herself from a case, but the Code does not apply to a justice of the United States Supreme Court; Whereas justices of the United States Supreme Court are not bound by any written code of conduct; Whereas justices of the United States Supreme Court each have unreviewable authority to determine whether there is an appearance of bias, conflict of interest, or other eth- ical justification sufficient for withdrawal from hearing, partaking in deliberations in, or joining in the resolution of, a case or controversy; Whereas the Federal Judicial Center has concluded that ‘‘bal- ancing the duty to decide’’ with ‘‘the duty to disqualify’’ VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:47 Oct 08, 2019 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR624.IH HR624 pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS 3 HRES 624 IH precludes judges from using recusal as an excuse to shirk their duties by avoiding difficult or unpleasant cases; Whereas the United States Constitution vests judicial power in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish; Whereas the separation of powers of the coordinate branches of government, as well as the independence of the judici- ary, or the appearance of independence, may be com- promised by extensive legislative or executive interference into that branch’s functions; Whereas James Madison argued in Federalist Paper Number 10 that ‘‘[n]o man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judg- ment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity’’; and Whereas the United States Supreme Court has acknowledged in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, and reiter- ated in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., that ‘‘[t]he citizen’s respect for judgments depends . . . upon the issuing court’s absolute probity’’ and that ‘‘[j]udicial in- tegrity is, in consequence, a state interest of the highest order’’: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep- 1 resentatives that the justices of the United States Su- 2 preme Court should make themselves subject to the exist- 3 ing and operative ethics guidelines set out in the Code of 4 Conduct for United States Judges, or should promulgate 5 their own code of conduct. 6 Æ VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:47 Oct 08, 2019 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6301 E:\BILLS\HR624.IH HR624 pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS