S 1814119th CongressIn Committee

Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025

Introduced: May 20, 2025

Sponsor: Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] (D-Rhode Island)

Civil Rights & Justice

Standard Summary

Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

This bill, the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025, would create a formal, publicly accessible ethics regime for the Supreme Court and for other federal judges. It requires the Supreme Court to adopt a code of conduct for justices and assigns the Judicial Conference responsibility for a code of conduct for federal appellate and district judges. It establishes new procedures for complaints against justices, strengthens disqualification rules, expands gift and disclosure requirements, and adds transparency around amicus (friend-of-the-court) activities. The act also creates new review mechanisms for disqualification motions, requires reporting and auditing of disclosures, and mandates studies and oversight to monitor compliance. Overall, it aims to increase transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the ethics of the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary. Key design features include: public access to ethics rules, a formal complaints process with a panel for investigations, expanded disqualification triggers tied to lobbying and gifts, mandatory disclosure of gifts and certain relationships, amicus-disclosure requirements, and regular studies and GAO reviews to assess compliance and effectiveness.

Key Points

1Codes of conduct and public comment
2- The bill requires the Supreme Court to issue a code of conduct for justices within 180 days of enactment, and the Judicial Conference to issue a code of conduct for federal appellate and district judges within the same timeframe, with public notice and opportunity for comment.
3- Both codes can be modified later with public notice and comment.
4Public access to ethics rules
5- The Supreme Court must publish the code of conduct, related rules from the Counselor to the Chief Justice, and other ethics rules on its website in searchable, downloadable form.
6Complaints against justices
7- Establishes procedures (within 180 days) to file complaints about a justice for violations of the code of conduct, or other federal-law provisions, or conduct that undermines the Court’s integrity.
8- Creates a Judicial Investigation Panel (five randomly selected chief judges from the circuit courts) to review and investigate complaints, issue findings and recommendations, and publish reports if not dismissed. The panel has investigative powers (hearings, subpoenas) and can involve staff.
9- The panel’s actions can lead to actions by the Supreme Court, including potential changes to rules or disciplinary measures.
10Strengthened disqualification standards for judges and justices
11- Expands disqualification triggers in 28 U.S.C. 455 to include lobbying contacts or substantial funds spent in support of a justice’s nomination, confirmation, or appointment.
12- Extends disqualification considerations to gifts or reimbursements received by a justice or their spouse, minor children, or related privately held entities, within a six-year window before assignment to a case.
13- Adds duties to identify financial interests and to notify parties if disqualification is required, and makes conforming edits to the language of section 455.
14- Requires court clerks to post timely notices of disqualification and related rulings, with explanations that identify the reasons for disqualification (while allowing redactions for sensitive information).
15New mechanism to review certified disqualification motions
16- Adds a new 28 U.S.C. 1660 establishing a process to review certified motions to disqualify judges, magistrate judges, or bankruptcy judges.
17- A three-judge reviewing panel (randomly selected from judges not on the same court as the subject judge) reviews the motion, with limits on panel composition by circuit.
18- The subject judge can provide written views, and the Supreme Court acts as the ultimate reviewing panel, excluding the judge who is the subject of the motion.
19Disclosure by parties and amici
20- Within one year, the Supreme Court must prescribe rules requiring parties or amici to disclose gifts, income, or reimbursements to any justice in connection with the case, along with information about the donors, lawyers, and affiliated entities.
21- Also requires disclosure of lobbying contacts or expenditures in support of the nomination/appointment of a justice.
22Amicus disclosures
23- Adds a new disclosure rule for amicus briefs: contributors to an amicus brief must be listed if they meet certain thresholds (e.g., certain percentage of gross revenue or monetary contributions).
24- Provides for an annual AOUSC audit to ensure compliance with these amicus-disclosure requirements.
25Conflicts related to amicus briefs
26- Establishes rules (to be set by the Supreme Court and Judicial Conference) to prohibit or strike amicus briefs that would cause a disqualification, and requires initial transmission of these rules to Congress.
27Studies and oversight
28- The Federal Judicial Center must study compliance with existing disclosure and recusal provisions (sections 144 and 455) within 180 days of enactment and every two years thereafter, with findings submitted to Congress.
29- Annual reports to Congress on study results; a GAO review every five years to assess methodologies and findings, including reviewing the amicus-disclosure audit.
30- GAO can access required records from the Federal Judicial Center and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts as needed.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- Supreme Court justices and the overall integrity of the Supreme Court; federal judges (courts of appeals and district courts) via the Judicial Conference; the judiciary administration (AOUSC, FJC).Secondary group/area affected- Litigants and their counsel, amicus organizations, and public interest groups involved in Supreme Court and federal court cases; political determinants of nominations and confirmations; parties providing gifts or lobbying in relation to judicial proceedings.Additional impacts- Increases transparency of ethics rules, gifts, and lobbying connections; creates formal complaint and disqualification processes; enhances public reporting and oversight through annual studies and GAO reviews; may influence strategies around amicus practice and litigation financing due to disclosure requirements; could affect how parties and amici prepare briefs if they must disclose financings and contributors.

Generated by gpt-5-nano on Oct 7, 2025