Justice Excuses Himself From Case In Compliance With New Code of Conduct

Illuminated courthouse building at dusk with columns

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch’s recusal from a Supreme Court case involving a Utah railroad sparks debate on judicial ethics and transparency.

At a Glance

  • Justice Gorsuch recused himself from a case potentially benefiting billionaire Philip F. Anschutz.
  • The recusal follows pressure from ethics watchdogs and Democratic lawmakers.
  • The case involves environmental regulations affecting oil drilling projects.
  • This is the first time a Republican-appointed justice has cited the new code of conduct in a recusal.
  • The recusal highlights ongoing concerns about Supreme Court ethics and transparency.

Gorsuch’s Recusal and Its Implications

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch has stepped back from a Supreme Court case concerning a proposed railroad in Utah and environmental regulations. The decision comes amid pressure from ethics watchdogs and Democratic lawmakers, citing Gorsuch’s past relationship with billionaire Philip F. Anschutz, who has interests in the oil industry that could be affected by the case’s outcome.

The Supreme Court’s clerk, Scott Harris, announced the recusal in a memo, stating it was “consistent with the code of conduct.” This marks the first instance of a Republican-appointed justice publicly citing the newly adopted code in a recusal decision.

The Case at Hand

The case in question revolves around whether the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to consider “downline impacts” of projects like oil drilling. Anschutz’s oil and gas company has filed a friend-of-the-court brief against the environmental regulation, claiming it imposes “absurd requirements” that could cause “significant harms to the project developers and the economy.”

Gorsuch’s ties to Anschutz are well-documented. He previously represented Anschutz as a corporate lawyer in the early 2000s, formed a joint property venture with him, and Anschutz played a role in Gorsuch’s federal appeals court nomination. These connections raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in the current case.

Broader Implications for Supreme Court Ethics

This recusal comes at a time of increased scrutiny of Supreme Court ethics, following revelations about Justice Clarence Thomas’s undisclosed gifts from billionaire Harlan Crow. The Supreme Court adopted its first code of conduct in November 2023, but it lacks an enforcement mechanism beyond voluntary compliance.

While some have praised Gorsuch’s decision to recuse, others argue that it highlights the need for greater transparency and enforceable ethical standards at the Supreme Court. Caroline Ciccone of Accountable US noted, “Justice Gorsuch only recused himself after this glaring conflict was brought to light,” emphasizing the impact of justices’ relationships with billionaires on public trust in the institution.

As the Supreme Court continues to navigate these ethical challenges, the Gorsuch recusal serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between judicial independence and the need for transparency to maintain public faith in the court’s impartiality and integrity.

Sources:

  1. Justice Neil Gorsuch Recuses From Case That Could Benefit Colorado Billionaire
  2. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch Recuses Himself From Case After Pressure

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR