Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has joined a coalition of Democratic lawmakers in introducing legislation that would impose statutory gift restrictions on U.S. Supreme Court justices, an effort aimed at closing what supporters describe as one of the judiciary’s most significant ethics gaps.
The proposed High Court Gift Ban Act, introduced in the Senate by Sens. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), with companion legislation sponsored in the House by Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Ocasio-Cortez, would prohibit Supreme Court justices from accepting gifts exceeding $50 per occasion or $100 in aggregate annually from a single source.
The legislation would also establish limits on gifts of personal hospitality, including luxury travel aboard private aircraft and yachts, an area that has received increasing scrutiny following a series of investigative reports examining relationships between several justices and wealthy benefactors.
Proposed statutory ethics standards
Unlike lower federal court judges, members of Congress, and executive branch employees—who are subject to detailed statutory and regulatory gift restrictions—Supreme Court justices are not currently governed by comparable monetary gift limits.
Supporters of the legislation argue that this distinction has created an ethics loophole that undermines public confidence in judicial independence.
“The Supreme Court is facing a major corruption crisis,” Ocasio-Cortez said in announcing the legislation.
“As it stands, Supreme Court Justices are legally allowed to accept gifts from wealthy benefactors and people with special interests before the Court, actively furthering the distrust between working-class Americans and our legal institutions.”
She characterized the measure as a “commonsense proposal” designed to remove the influence of “dark money” from the nation’s highest court.
Legislative background
The High Court Gift Ban Act would codify gift restrictions similar to those already applicable throughout much of the federal government.
Among its principal provisions, the bill would:
- Prohibit gifts valued at more than $50 on any single occasion.
- Limit annual gifts from the same source to $100.
- Restrict personal hospitality benefits, including luxury travel and similar high-value accommodations.
- Align Supreme Court ethics rules with standards already applicable to federal judges and other federal officials.
Although the Supreme Court adopted its first formal Code of Conduct in 2023, critics have argued that the code lacks meaningful enforcement mechanisms and does not fully address concerns regarding gifts and outside benefits.
Ethics concerns continue to shape reform efforts
The legislation follows years of public scrutiny surrounding reports that some Supreme Court justices accepted expensive travel, lodging, and other benefits from wealthy individuals with interests before the Court.
Bill sponsors cited analyses estimating that members of the Court have collectively accepted at least 445 gifts valued at nearly $5 million over the past two decades.
Those reports have included allegations that Justice Clarence Thomas received more than $4.2 million in luxury travel and related benefits, including international vacations, private resort stays, and other financial accommodations from wealthy benefactors.
Justice Thomas has maintained that he complied with disclosure rules as they were understood at the time, while subsequent revisions to judicial disclosure guidance have sought to clarify reporting requirements.
Restoring public confidence
According to Sen. Luján, the legislation is intended to strengthen institutional legitimacy rather than target individual members of the Court.
“Over the past several years, we’ve seen far too many reports detailing how lavish gifts and luxury travel have undermined public confidence in the Supreme Court,” Luján said.
He argued that the nation’s highest court should be held to “the highest ethical standards.”
Sen. Peter Welch similarly asserted that allegations involving gifts and travel have contributed to declining public trust.
“It’s unethical, and it’s why public trust in the Court has eroded,” Welch said.
Rep. Jamie Raskin described the current framework as an anomaly within federal ethics law.
“In every other part of the federal government, taking lavish gifts from interested parties is called corruption—but at the Supreme Court, it’s bizarrely been treated as a job perk,” Raskin said.
He argued that Americans should not have to question whether luxury travel or expensive gifts influence judicial decision-making.
Prospects in Congress
The legislation has received endorsements from numerous organizations focused on judicial accountability, ethics, transparency, and government reform, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Public Citizen, Alliance for Justice, Fix the Court, the National Women’s Law Center, and several labor and civic advocacy organizations.
Despite growing attention to Supreme Court ethics, the bill faces uncertain prospects in Congress, where broader judicial reform proposals have frequently divided lawmakers along partisan lines.
If enacted, however, the High Court Gift Ban Act would represent one of the most significant statutory ethics reforms directed specifically at Supreme Court justices, placing the Court under gift restrictions substantially similar to those already imposed on other branches of the federal government.
