US Supreme Court Justices and Other Judges Can Stay at Corporate-Owned Homes Without Disclosure, Reports Reuters

By Nate Raymond

U.S. Supreme Court justices and federal judges on lower courts are no longer required to publicly disclose when they attend private dinners or stay at personal residences, even those owned by business entities, according to a new ethics rule announced on Monday.

The updated policy was released by the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Committee on Financial Disclosure, which establishes guidelines for the nine justices and other federal judges. Critics argue that this change undermines existing ethics requirements.

The committee has been examining accusations that Justice Clarence Thomas, part of the court’s conservative majority, failed to report gifts, including luxury travel, from affluent Texas businessman and Republican donor Harlan Crow.

Donald Sherman, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), criticized the new policy, suggesting it effectively creates a special exception for Thomas.

The Supreme Court has faced increasing scrutiny over ethical issues, especially regarding undisclosed trips and gifts involving Thomas and other justices. Last year, the court introduced its first formal code of conduct for its justices, yet the policy lacks an enforcement mechanism.

The judiciary’s rule-making body stated that recent updates to the disclosure regulations were intended to clarify the definition of "personal hospitality" in relation to gifts received at private residences owned by corporate entities, which judges no longer need to include in their disclosure reports.

Gabe Roth, leader of the advocacy group Fix the Court, expressed concern that this new policy weakens previous regulations and may allow past stays by Thomas at Crow’s properties to go undisclosed. These stays include visits to Camp Topridge, a private lakeside resort in upstate New York owned by a Crow-affiliated entity.

Thomas has previously argued that he was advised against the necessity of reporting such "personal hospitality."

Legal representatives for Thomas and Crow, along with officials from the Supreme Court, have not commented on the matter.

In response to concerns from Democratic U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and others, stricter regulations were put in place by the disclosure committee in March 2023, making it more challenging for judges to invoke the personal hospitality exception.

Under the prior rules, judges were still not required to report gifts that include food, lodging, or entertainment for non-business purposes. However, those rules specified that the exception did not extend to stays at commercial properties like hotels and resorts, nor to gifts of hospitality funded by an entity or third party not directly providing the hospitality.

With the recent rule change, stays at a host’s personal residence can be exempt from disclosure if the property is owned by an entity rather than an individual, provided the residence is not regularly rented out and is not classified as commercial property.