Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was appointed by Democrat President Joe Biden, is currently facing an ethics complaint. Throughout the year, Democrats and their media allies have been actively trying to create controversies and scandals surrounding the conservative justices on the Supreme Court.
However, it seems that the tables have turned. A conservative watchdog group has recently filed an ethics complaint against Justice Jackson, accusing her of “willful” violations of federal law and ethics disclosure requirements.
The complaint specifically points out her repeated failure to disclose certain income received by her husband and her failure to report certain “gifts” she has received. The watchdog group is now calling for a formal criminal investigation into these allegations.
The ethics complaint was filed by the Center for Renewing America, a conservative think tank aligned with the America First movement and led by Russ Vought, who previously served as the head of the Office of Management and Budget in President Donald Trump’s White House. The complaint highlights at least two apparent violations of disclosure requirements outlined in the Ethics in Government Act of 1978.
One of those statutes is 5 U.S.C. § 13104(e)(1)(A), which requires the disclosure of “The source of items of earned income earned by a spouse from any person which exceed $1,000 … except that … if the spouse is self-employed in business or a profession, only the nature of such business or profession need be reported.”
The other statute is 5 U.S.C. § 13104(a)(2)(A), which requires disclosure of “The identity of the source, a brief description, and the value of all gifts aggregating more than the minimal value” of $415 that were received from “any source other than a relative” and with exceptions for “any food, lodging, or entertainment received as personal hospitality” or items valued at less than $100 that don’t need to be included in the annual aggregate.
Given the alleged violations of those two statutes by Justice Jackson, the ethics complaint pointed to 5 U.S.C. § 13106(b), which calls for a criminal referral to the U.S. attorney general if there is “reasonable cause to believe” the referred individual “has willfully failed to file a report or has willfully falsified or willfully failed to file information required to be reported.”
On Monday, CRA’s Vought sent a letter to the Judicial Conference and stated that “Justice Jackson appears to have willfully failed to disclose required information regarding her husband’s medical malpractice consulting income for over a decade.”
“There is reason to believe that Justice Jackson may have failed to report the private funding sources of her massive investiture celebration at the Library of Congress in her most recent financial disclosure.”
“The Conference should open an investigation to determine if Justice Jackson needs to remedy this potential omission,” Vought wrote.
“Given the need to ensure the equal application of the law and the tendency of these violations to create serious recusal issues and conflicts of interest, the Conference’s prompt attention is of paramount public importance.”
In 2012, when Jackson assumed her role as a federal judge, she initially complied with the disclosure requirements and reported her husband’s income from medical malpractice consulting fees in 2011. However, in subsequent annual filings, she has failed to disclose any such income.
During her Senate confirmation hearings in 2022 for her nomination to the Supreme Court, Jackson herself acknowledged this issue.
Furthermore, the letter expressed concerns regarding Jackson’s failure to disclose the source of funding for a privately-funded celebration of her confirmation. The event, hosted by the Library of Congress, included several musical performances, food, entertainment, venue fees, and staff. According to the law, all of these elements constituted a “gift” valued at over $415, and therefore, should have been publicly disclosed.
“Justice Jackson has demonstrated a disturbing trend of not reporting material sources of income and gifts,” Vought wrote in conclusion.
“As described above, she has failed to report the years in which her husband has received income for his medical malpractice consulting, a blatant violation of EIGA. And she continues to fail to report the sources of her husband’s legal consultation income.”
“Moreover, she has potentially failed to disclose private funders of her unprecedented investiture celebration,” he continued.
“By doing so, Justice Jackson has shielded potential conflicts of interest from public scrutiny and undermined the ability of the public, outside watchdog groups, and parties to scrutinize her recusal decisions.”
“Given the risk for these potentially willful omissions to create conflicts of interest and recusal issues, and the need to ensure equal application of the law, the Conference should refer Justice Jackson to the Attorney General for her failure to disclose her husband’s consulting income and open an investigation into the potential private funding of her investiture celebration,” Vought added.
