WASHINGTON — The federal courts announced Thursday that they will not refer allegations that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas may have violated ethics laws to the Justice Department. This decision follows ongoing scrutiny regarding Thomas's acceptance of undisclosed luxury trips and gifts from wealthy benefactors, including prominent Republican donor Harlan Crow, as stated by the judiciary’s policymaking body, the U.S. Judicial Conference.

In a letter addressed to Democratic senators who had requested an investigation, the Judicial Conference confirmed that Thomas has agreed to adhere to updated requirements for reporting trips and gifts, specifying clearer guidelines for hospitality received from friends. Thomas has maintained that he was not obligated to disclose numerous trips funded by Crow, whom he described as a “close personal friend” (source: CBS News).

Despite the Supreme Court introducing its first-ever code of ethics in 2023 amid growing criticism, this code lacks effective enforcement mechanisms. In a related comment, U.S. District Judge Robert Conrad, who serves as secretary for the conference, noted that the law remains ambiguous regarding the Judicial Conference's authority to formally refer cases concerning a Supreme Court justice for criminal investigation (source: Los Angeles Times).

The decision not to pursue a referral was deemed unnecessary by Conrad, given that two Democratic senators previously urged Attorney General Merrick Garland to designate a special counsel to probe these allegations. However, as of now, no such appointments have been made publicly (source: Newsweek).

Advocacy group Fix the Court has continued to push for a more transparent and accountable system for reviewing potential ethics violations by justices. Gabe Roth, the executive director, argued that the financial disclosure regulations must be applicable to all justices. “The Conference’s letters further underscore the need for Congress to create a new and transparent mechanism to investigate the justices for ethics violations,” Roth stated (source: HuffPost).

This latest decision follows similar scrutiny of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who recently amended her disclosures regarding her husband's consulting income (source: AP News).