Legis Daily

Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025

USA119th CongressS-1814| Senate 
| Updated: 5/20/2025
Sheldon Whitehouse

Sheldon Whitehouse

Democratic Senator

Rhode Island

Cosponsors (28)
Jeanne Shaheen (Democratic)Mazie K. Hirono (Democratic)Ruben Gallego (Democratic)Adam B. Schiff (Democratic)Richard J. Durbin (Democratic)Edward J. Markey (Democratic)Jack Reed (Democratic)Kirsten E. Gillibrand (Democratic)Alex Padilla (Democratic)Christopher A. Coons (Democratic)Amy Klobuchar (Democratic)John W. Hickenlooper (Democratic)Tim Kaine (Democratic)Jacky Rosen (Democratic)Chris Van Hollen (Democratic)Martin Heinrich (Democratic)Patty Murray (Democratic)John Fetterman (Democratic)Tina Smith (Democratic)Bernard Sanders (Independent)Brian Schatz (Democratic)Tammy Baldwin (Democratic)Cory A. Booker (Democratic)Peter Welch (Democratic)Jeff Merkley (Democratic)Ron Wyden (Democratic)Richard Blumenthal (Democratic)Mark Kelly (Democratic)

Judiciary Committee

  • Introduced
  • In Committee
  • On Floor
  • Passed Chamber
  • Enacted
The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025 aims to enhance ethical standards and transparency within the federal judiciary, particularly for Supreme Court justices. It mandates that the Supreme Court issue a comprehensive code of conduct for its justices within 180 days, following public notice and comment. Similarly, the Judicial Conference must establish a code of conduct for other federal judges, and both codes must be publicly accessible on the Supreme Court's website. A key provision establishes a formal process for handling complaints against justices , requiring the Supreme Court to create procedures for individuals to file allegations of code violations, federal law breaches, or conduct undermining the Court's integrity. These complaints, which must be sworn and fact-based, would be referred to a judicial investigation panel composed of five randomly selected chief circuit judges. This panel is empowered to investigate, hold hearings, issue subpoenas, and present findings and recommendations—including disciplinary actions—to the Supreme Court, with public reports for non-dismissed complaints. The bill significantly strengthens disclosure and recusal standards . It directs the Counselor to the Chief Justice to establish rules for justices and their law clerks regarding the acceptance and disclosure of gifts, income, and reimbursements, aligning these with the stricter standards of the Senate and House of Representatives. Furthermore, it expands the circumstances under which a justice must disqualify themselves from a case, including situations where a party to the proceeding made lobbying contacts or spent substantial funds supporting the justice's nomination or confirmation. Disqualification is also required if a justice, their spouse, minor child, or a related entity received income or gifts from a party within six years of the proceeding. To ensure impartiality, the legislation introduces a mechanism for the review of certified disqualification motions , where a panel of judges or the Supreme Court itself (excluding the justice in question) would rule on such motions. It also mandates new disclosure requirements for parties and amici curiae, compelling them to list gifts, income, reimbursements, or lobbying efforts made to justices. Additionally, amicus brief filers must disclose significant financial contributors to their brief or organization, with annual audits conducted by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Finally, the bill establishes robust oversight and reporting requirements . The Federal Judicial Center is tasked with conducting biennial studies on compliance with judicial recusal statutes and reporting its findings to Congress. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) will periodically review these studies and the amicus disclosure audits, with authorized access to relevant records from the Federal Judicial Center and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to ensure thoroughness and accountability.
View Full Text

Suggested Questions

Get AI-generated questions to help you understand this bill better

Timeline

Bill from Previous Congress

S 117-4188
Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2022

Bill from Previous Congress

S 118-359
Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023
May 20, 2025

Latest Companion Bill Action

HR 119-3513
Introduced in House
May 20, 2025
Introduced in Senate
May 20, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  • Bill from Previous Congress

    S 117-4188
    Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2022


  • Bill from Previous Congress

    S 118-359
    Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023


  • May 20, 2025

    Latest Companion Bill Action

    HR 119-3513
    Introduced in House


  • May 20, 2025
    Introduced in Senate


  • May 20, 2025
    Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Law

Related Bills

  • HR 119-3513: Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025

Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025

USA119th CongressS-1814| Senate 
| Updated: 5/20/2025
The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025 aims to enhance ethical standards and transparency within the federal judiciary, particularly for Supreme Court justices. It mandates that the Supreme Court issue a comprehensive code of conduct for its justices within 180 days, following public notice and comment. Similarly, the Judicial Conference must establish a code of conduct for other federal judges, and both codes must be publicly accessible on the Supreme Court's website. A key provision establishes a formal process for handling complaints against justices , requiring the Supreme Court to create procedures for individuals to file allegations of code violations, federal law breaches, or conduct undermining the Court's integrity. These complaints, which must be sworn and fact-based, would be referred to a judicial investigation panel composed of five randomly selected chief circuit judges. This panel is empowered to investigate, hold hearings, issue subpoenas, and present findings and recommendations—including disciplinary actions—to the Supreme Court, with public reports for non-dismissed complaints. The bill significantly strengthens disclosure and recusal standards . It directs the Counselor to the Chief Justice to establish rules for justices and their law clerks regarding the acceptance and disclosure of gifts, income, and reimbursements, aligning these with the stricter standards of the Senate and House of Representatives. Furthermore, it expands the circumstances under which a justice must disqualify themselves from a case, including situations where a party to the proceeding made lobbying contacts or spent substantial funds supporting the justice's nomination or confirmation. Disqualification is also required if a justice, their spouse, minor child, or a related entity received income or gifts from a party within six years of the proceeding. To ensure impartiality, the legislation introduces a mechanism for the review of certified disqualification motions , where a panel of judges or the Supreme Court itself (excluding the justice in question) would rule on such motions. It also mandates new disclosure requirements for parties and amici curiae, compelling them to list gifts, income, reimbursements, or lobbying efforts made to justices. Additionally, amicus brief filers must disclose significant financial contributors to their brief or organization, with annual audits conducted by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Finally, the bill establishes robust oversight and reporting requirements . The Federal Judicial Center is tasked with conducting biennial studies on compliance with judicial recusal statutes and reporting its findings to Congress. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) will periodically review these studies and the amicus disclosure audits, with authorized access to relevant records from the Federal Judicial Center and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to ensure thoroughness and accountability.
View Full Text

Suggested Questions

Get AI-generated questions to help you understand this bill better

Timeline

Bill from Previous Congress

S 117-4188
Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2022

Bill from Previous Congress

S 118-359
Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023
May 20, 2025

Latest Companion Bill Action

HR 119-3513
Introduced in House
May 20, 2025
Introduced in Senate
May 20, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  • Bill from Previous Congress

    S 117-4188
    Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2022


  • Bill from Previous Congress

    S 118-359
    Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023


  • May 20, 2025

    Latest Companion Bill Action

    HR 119-3513
    Introduced in House


  • May 20, 2025
    Introduced in Senate


  • May 20, 2025
    Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Sheldon Whitehouse

Sheldon Whitehouse

Democratic Senator

Rhode Island

Cosponsors (28)
Jeanne Shaheen (Democratic)Mazie K. Hirono (Democratic)Ruben Gallego (Democratic)Adam B. Schiff (Democratic)Richard J. Durbin (Democratic)Edward J. Markey (Democratic)Jack Reed (Democratic)Kirsten E. Gillibrand (Democratic)Alex Padilla (Democratic)Christopher A. Coons (Democratic)Amy Klobuchar (Democratic)John W. Hickenlooper (Democratic)Tim Kaine (Democratic)Jacky Rosen (Democratic)Chris Van Hollen (Democratic)Martin Heinrich (Democratic)Patty Murray (Democratic)John Fetterman (Democratic)Tina Smith (Democratic)Bernard Sanders (Independent)Brian Schatz (Democratic)Tammy Baldwin (Democratic)Cory A. Booker (Democratic)Peter Welch (Democratic)Jeff Merkley (Democratic)Ron Wyden (Democratic)Richard Blumenthal (Democratic)Mark Kelly (Democratic)

Judiciary Committee

Law

Related Bills

  • HR 119-3513: Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025
  • Introduced
  • In Committee
  • On Floor
  • Passed Chamber
  • Enacted