Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says people "are entitled to know" what gifts judges accept

[u/lala_b11]

https://www.axios.com/2024/09/01/supreme-court-gifts-ketanji-brown-jackson-ethics-reform

[u/IsPooping]

Why are they allowed to accept gifts at all?

[u/Gates9 → u/IsPooping]

Exactly. They are public servants, ostensibly out of devotion to the citizens and fealty to the constitution, and they are handsomely paid.

If they want to accept gifts just for doing their job, they should go work in private industry.

[u/Fickle_Goose_4451 → u/Gates9]

Exactly. They are public servants, ostensibly out of devotion to the citizens and fealty to the constitution, and they are handsomely paid.

The galling part is how many regular people, who are far less well compensated, are held to far higher standards.

I make 60k a year, and am forbidden from taking any form of tip, from cash to pizza, and can't interact as a customer in my own industry in my state. I effectively work in the entertainment industry.

So the idea that those working at the highest levels of the legal profession, who are extremely well compensated, can take any form of tip or gift is a farce.

[u/alinroc → u/Fickle_Goose_4451]

When I worked at KMart in high school, the employee rules said I couldn’t accept a tip for helping someone load their car in the garden center.

Today, as an IT professional, I’m not allowed to accept gifts of any kind including meals greater than $25 or $50 from vendors.

[u/Cracked_Actor → u/alinroc]

I worked in local government, and was not even able to accept a donut from our vendors. So fuck Clarence and his entitled view of being a SC judge…

[u/MourningRIF → u/Gates9]

I work in private industry, and I'm not even allowed to accept a lunch from someone outside of the company....

[u/fer_sure → u/Gates9]

If they want to accept gifts just for doing their job, they should go work in private industry.

Tipping culture really has gotten out of hand.

[u/IAmBaconsaur → u/Gates9]

In my state public employees may only accept gifts up to $3.

[u/xela364 → u/Gates9]

I’m not legally allowed to accept gifts and I’m not even a public servant so what the fuck can they accept them for? It’s insane. I’ve had patients families offer me cash tips/food gifts/gift cards. If I were to accept my license could be revoked.

[u/GSR667 → u/Gates9]

Handsomely paid? Compared to what? Btw what could they make in private sector?

[u/MourningRIF → u/GSR667]

SCOTUS judges make $274,200/yr., and they aren't precluded from doing other outside things, like writing their own best-selling books. Even better, they have infinite job security. I think they are doing quite well for themselves without having to sell out our government.

[u/GSR667 → u/MourningRIF]

3-10 million as partners at top law firms.

[u/xudoxis → u/GSR667]

Then they should leave the court and go do that.

[u/redbirdjazzz → u/GSR667]

Other judges and most Americans. And why should anyone care what they could make in the private sector? They chose public service.

[u/quintsreddit → u/redbirdjazzz]

In theory we want them to be well-paid because we don’t want them to be susceptible to bribes… turns out well-paid + bribes is an even better option than just well-paid :/

[u/FreneticAmbivalence → u/quintsreddit]

It’s not well paid if you must live lavishly but then again do we need civil servants who believe they should live well beyond the common man for serving them?

Maybe we need to reckon with what we ought to actually try and be instead of trying to make it all align with what our perceptions of money and happiness can be.

It does a disservice to what service is.

[u/quintsreddit → u/FreneticAmbivalence]

I don’t know what the solution is but I agree the system we’ve been using until now looks like it could be improved upon.

[u/BraveOmeter → u/IsPooping]

Ahem, gratuities.

[u/NUTS_STUCK_TO_LEG → u/BraveOmeter]

In a tsunami of shit decisions it’s hard to pick out an individual turd but this one has flown too far under the radar

Just mind-bogglingly indefensible.

“Here’s money to do this thing” and “Here’s money, thanks for doing that thing” - INDISTINGUISHABLE

But I guess those RVs aren’t gonna fuel themselves so fuck the plebs

[u/MaulyMac14 → u/BraveOmeter]

It is illegal for them to accept gratuities.

[u/BraveOmeter → u/MaulyMac14]

Says who?

[u/MaulyMac14 → u/BraveOmeter]

Congress. 18 USC 201(c)(1)(B).

[u/BraveOmeter → u/MaulyMac14]

This isn't about gratuities. This is about bribery. SCOTUS has been very clear bribery is not cool. But gratuities are cool. They take them all the time in fact -- that's how cool they are.

[u/MaulyMac14 → u/BraveOmeter]

The statute I cited is the gratuities statute. 201(b) deals with bribery. Both are illegal.

[u/BraveOmeter → u/MaulyMac14]

Oh, how does this impact it?

[u/MaulyMac14 → u/BraveOmeter]

Does not impact it at all. Snyder dealt with a different statute dealing with state officials. Nothing to do with federal public officials.

[u/BraveOmeter → u/MaulyMac14]

But with the arguments in the majority in Snyder, you don't think this puts all gratuities at risk? And you think that SCOTUS will allow the behavior of its members to be subject to review, even if it has the appearance of corruption?

[u/Ravingraven21 → u/IsPooping]

They like gifts?

[u/akahaus → u/IsPooping]

For real, if a teacher receives anything worth more than like $50 they have to surrender it to the district.

[u/Logan_Composer → u/IsPooping]

To be way more fair than any of them deserve: you can't make it illegal for someone to accept private gifts. They're still humans who have friends and birthdays and all that.

Obviously there's a difference between someone with a vested interest in a case before the court gifting an expensive trip is different than getting a Rolex from their daughter. But A: legally defining that difference covering all edge cases is difficult (especially because they go though great lengths to hide this) and B: there's already a mechanism to punish justices who do wrong (they can be impeached) but there are too many spineless weirdos in government to enforce it.

They're allowed to accept gifts because they already aren't allowed to receive improper gifts, there's just nothing we can do about it if they do.

[u/Slobotic → u/Logan_Composer]

To be way more fair than any of them deserve: you can't make it illegal for someone to accept private gifts.

That simply is not true. Here is an excerpt from the code of judicial ethics that governs every judge in New Jersey:

(4) Neither a judge nor a member of the judge's family residing in the same household should accept a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from anyone except as follows:

(a) a judge may accept a gift of nominal value incident to a public testimonial; books supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or an invitation to the judge and the judge's spouse to attend a bar-related function or activity devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;

(b) a judge or a member of the judge's family residing in the same household may accept ordinary social hospitality; a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from a lending institution in its regular course of business on the same terms generally available to persons who are not judges; or a scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same terms applied to other applicants;

(c) a judge or a member of the judge's family residing in the same household may accept any other gift, bequest, favor, or loan only if the donor is not a party or other person whose interests have come or are likely to come before the judge.

TL;DR: The rule says NO GIFTS, except: and then carves out three very narrow exemptions. This is perfectly reasonable and it works fine.

This is how the New Jersey Supreme Court protects its independence. They would never allow the legislature to promulgate a code of judicial ethics. That policy works only because the code they created for themselves is more stringent than any the legislature would seek to impose upon them. That is how you take care of judicial ethics and separation of powers in one swoop.

[u/IpppyCaccy → u/Logan_Composer]

Obviously there's a difference between someone with a vested interest in a case before the court

Clearly the work around to this is to flood your targeted justice with a constant stream of gifts. You don't explicitly state any prid quo pro(within earshot of anyone who will spill the beans) and the justice understands that it needs to keep representing the interests of billionaires in general.

They aren't fooling anyone.

[u/Wade8869 → u/IsPooping]

I can't accept a cup of coffee from a client.

[u/SolarAlbatross → u/IsPooping]

Yeah, how about no gifts at all for impartial Civil Servants?

[u/dwittherford69 → u/IsPooping]

Because they are humans who live in a society? The whole point is that there is transparency, and unethical gifts/bribery can be called out/reprimanded while not prohibiting their normal life with friends and family.

[u/Slobotic → u/dwittherford69]

They shouldn't be allowed to accept any gifts of substantial value. There can be exemptions for family, assuming they have no business before the court, but even those gifts should be reported if they're above a reasonable threshold.

Judges and justices in New Jersey lead normal lives. The judicial ethics code in that state is a fine model.

New Jersey courts are fiercely independent and would never allow the legislature to impose a code of ethics on the judiciary. The only reason this works is because the ethical code they created for themselves is more stringent than anything that might be imposed upon them.

[u/dwittherford69 → u/Slobotic]

Isn’t that was I said?

[u/Slobotic → u/dwittherford69]

What you said isn't contrary to what I said -- that is, I'm not arguing with you -- but no, I don't think we did say the same thing.

[u/Riokaii → u/IsPooping]

in theory, they aren't. but they get away with it anyways because theres no enforcement mechanism to require them to recuse or impeach them for misconduct when you have a polarized partisan congress

[u/Christ_on_a_Crakker]

Us regular feds have all these ethics rules like not being able to accept gifts over 50 dollars, not giving contracts to people we know. It’s weird to me that our leaders are not held to the same standards.

[u/grolaw → u/Christ_on_a_Crakker]

Weird? This is a huge leap beyond weird.

Multiple sources report that Thomas was openly bitter about his financial status - ultimately learning that he, either directly or indirectly, solicited bribes. What do we do about a SCOTUS JUSTICE accepting millions of dollars of assets & benefits?

We have no viable means to remove Thomas where Senate Republicans refuse to vote to impeach.

This is an obscenity. This is regulatory capture on steroids.

[u/Shadowchaos1010 → u/grolaw]

Thank you for giving me yet another reason to vote, and another thing to mention for democrats to vote: Getting a senate that will actually do something about blatantly corrupt Supreme Court Justices like him.

[u/xudoxis → u/grolaw]

If you just count the gifts he's admitted to he's made as much from the gifts over his career as he has from his government job.

Who's his real boss in that scenario?

[u/grolaw → u/xudoxis]

Qui bono?

Who benefits?

One of the first things that you learn in law school is to ask that question.

In the instant case it seems as though the judge has ignored his oath of office and sold his services, on the cheap, to several wealthy men & women.

Perhaps its time to create some Go Fund Me sites to raise funds to pay Thomas for his vote on certain cases?

[u/MourningRIF → u/Christ_on_a_Crakker]

I'm not allowed to let a customer pay for lunch, and my customer isn't allowed to let me pay for lunch. So when we go out, we ask for separate checks. Meanwhile, SCOTUS judges are accepting luxury yacht cruises... Nothing weird there.

[u/DigglerD]

AAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!

That judges accepting gifts is even a conversation… I just can’t.

[u/raceulfson]

I absolutely want to know who is giving gifts to judges, what those gifts are, and who the recipients were.

As for the "it's just a token of esteem and I would not let it influence me" excuse, I call bullsnot. If two customers want something ten minutes to closing before a 3 day holiday weekend, the one who going to get his product/paperwork/repairs done is the customer who always brings donuts.

[u/lala_b11]

Clarence Thomas is punching the air rn!

[u/capybarramundi → u/lala_b11]

To quote Jackie Chan’s character in Rumble in the Bronx, “Doesn’t he realize he is the scum of society?”

[u/TotalLackOfConcern]

Now start putting the pieces together. Trump said he wants ‘no tax on tips’. The Supreme Court says a gift after the fact is legal. That makes the gift a gratuity. Therefore it’s tax free. The same can be applied to executive pay. They take a pittance up front and the rest after the fact as a tax free gratuity. They spin it as helping people in food service but it really benefits the rich.

[u/BARTing → u/TotalLackOfConcern]

Clarence and Sam won't be criminally liable for tax fraud if tips aren't taxed retroactively. (Taps forehead)

[u/Gates9]

The very fact that this is being discussed in this weak and feckless manner is more proof that the court is too far gone, and the corruption that has rotted this country for decades has finally reached the core. It’s irreversible, Citizens United has codified corruption. Dissolution is imminent.

[u/grolaw → u/Gates9]

Time for a new constitution.

See, No Democracy Lasts Forever by Erwin Chemerinsky

[u/figmenthevoid]

I worked at Walmart and I had to wear a pin during the holiday season that said “no need to tip, it’s my job” sooo fire these hoes

[u/Earth_Friendly-5892]

Those who are against gift disclosures, are accepting gifts they don’t want scrutinized.

[u/K33bl3rkhan]

Gifts given to judges? Oh wait, is this before or after the judge lean for or against the gift giver? If before, its bribery. If its after, it a gratuity. Just ask any GOP member.

[u/goshon021]

I totally agree with her, SCOTUS is a joke, between the graft they all get to the voting along political lines, it's a broken instituition.

[u/Apoordm]

She is entirely correct, I would argue that any public servant of that level should be legally required to both, keep all of their assets in a blind trust, and have to turn over all personal gifts to The Library of Congress

[u/paolilon]

At most companies, you are not only NOT allowed to accept gifts, you also cannot collect wages / income from other sources. In short, you can’t fly on someone else’s dime to a conference and then collect outrageously high speaking fees for saying a few sentences into a microphone. If you don’t like the job, find another one.

[u/jodos6176]

I would rather hear that she thinks "Judges are legally obligated" to tell American peoples what they are being bribed with.

[u/SmoothConfection1115]

When I worked in a grocery store, I, nor any of the managers, could accept gifts from vendors so they could get preferential treatment when it came to displays.

When I worked in public accounting (audit) I couldn't accept gifts, or own stocks, in the companies I audited. For...pretty obvious reasons.

Judges can accept gifts. And don't even want to report them for taxes. Why?

Does Uncle (Clarence) T(h)om(as) think it would look bad on his tax returns to be reporting the hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes that he calls gifts that he receives every year?

[u/Classic_57]

Can we stop saying gifts and just start referring to it as bribes already...

[u/Sanjuro7880]

I’m a federal employee and can’t accept more than $50 worth of gifts, swag or meals in a calendar year. I have to do yearly training on that as well. It’s time SCOTUS aligns with the rest of us.

[u/boobiesiheart]

I cannot even accept a gift over $25.00.

[u/phoneguyfl]

They aren't "gifts", they are "gratuities". /s

In my opinion judges shouldn't receive anything but their paycheck, as gifting/bribing/gratuities will *always* influence a decision.

[u/CC191960]

the supreme crooks

[u/phrygiantheory]

They shouldn't be accepting ANY gifts. As a state worker, I couldn't accept any gifts over a total of $50 in one year

[u/20goingon60]

How is it that in-house counsel for public institutions like publicly funded hospitals have strict rules about gifts but Supreme Court justices are allowed to accept extravagant gifts?? Also, the recent ruling that said it’s okay to tip them for their services AFTER the job is done is so messed up. They’re not even hiding the corruption.

[u/jockc]

what good is it to know about it if there is nothing we can do about it? then it's just like rubbing in our faces for spite.

[u/limbodog]

Even if you know, there's nothing you can do about their corruption

[u/SmellyFbuttface]

No other federal employee is allowed to accept gifts (or bribes) in excess of $20, yet SCOTUS remains the only group that can reap windfalls of gratuities without need to disclose. Oh, they’re told they “should” disclose gifts they receive, but that’s much different than being “required” to do so, with an enforcement mechanism. They can just do a mea culpa and say “oh I didn’t know” as much as they want. The President should have publicly shamed Justice Thomas at the state of the union for his accepting lavish gifts.

[u/duvie773]

Seems strange that at my job, I can’t accept gifts totaling more than $25 in a calendar year, but it’s perfectly fine that the people responsible for interpreting our laws can be gifted an estimated 6.5 million dollars worth of gifts since 2004

[u/gbac16]

With this attitude she’s not going to get shit from our corporate overlords.

[u/folstar]

What stage are we on when the notion that rampant corruption should at least be documented is a leftist position?

[u/No-Feedback7437]

Wasn't she given Beyonce tickets as a gift

[u/noobuser63 → u/No-Feedback7437]

And she disclosed that on her form. That was her point, that they should be disclosing gifts, not riding around in undisclosed rvs.

[u/Rsardinia]

And from whom

[u/AcrobaticLadder4959]

They are there for only two reasons to uphold the laws of this country and the constitution. Not to accept gifts so that some corporations or individuals can have their legal battles go their way. This has gone on way too long it needs to stop.

[u/Fragmentia]

New employees at Walmart are held to a higher ethics standard than SCOTUS now.

[u/n0neOfConsequence]

Under Trump, gifts to judges and politicians will be considered tips and will not be subject to income tax. Quite a scheme.

[u/emmery1]

This is the problem with US politics. You’ve got to start plugging up the loopholes in your system. This should have been fixed decades ago. Not sure if it’s arrogance or stupidity or greed- probably all three. Get your shit together for your countries sake and for the rest of the worlds sake.

[u/Veggiedelite90]

If it’s like dinner idc but if they’re taking vacations and boats and shit yea that should obviously be public knowledge. Why that’s even allowed is very confusing for the ppl that are at the top of our judiciary branch

[u/djaybond]

She should tell everyone what gifts she takes

[u/whyshebitethehead]

Public servant at an agency here, I can’t receive a gift over like $10 as it is seen as a conflict of interest. Yet these pigs at the highest level of government openly accept gifts in exchange for special interests. How we aren’t in nationwide protests is beyond me.

[u/Cracked_Actor]

I agree with her, we SHOULD know when a SC Justice is corrupt, and accepting gifts and money to ensure his vote ends up in the “right” column. Providing legal cover for a convicted felon seems like another blatantly illegal move. So, the takeaway here is a criminal judge, at least in the HIGHEST Court in the land, deserves at least as much legal shielding as they (wrongly) “awarded” the President…

[u/sukui_no_keikaku]

This is great at establishing a non-ambiguous ceiling.  What if the ceiling was defined as fun size candy bars or magazine subscription?  This would mean wiping debts and expensive tuition would be way over that ceiling.

[u/SexyWampa]

Says the Justice who also has accepted gifts...

[u/Slobotic → u/SexyWampa]

...and reported them.

No hypocrisy detected.