IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 624 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the justices of 

the United States Supreme Court should make themselves subject to 

the existing and operative ethics guidelines set out in the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, or should promulgate their own code 

of conduct. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 8, 2019 

Ms. NORTON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the justices of the United States Supreme Court should 

make themselves subject to the existing and operative 

ethics guidelines set out in the Code of Conduct for 

United States Judges, or should promulgate their own 

code of conduct. 

Whereas section 455 of title 28, United States Code, establishes the circumstances under which any justice, judge, 

or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify 

himself or herself from a case; 

Whereas under chapter 16 of title 28, United States Code 

(relating to complaints against judges and judicial discipline), the judicial circuits may prescribe rules and proVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:47 Oct 08, 2019 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR624.IH HR624

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HRES 624 IH 

cedures for the conduct of proceedings under that chapter, including regarding complaint, investigative, and review procedures for certain decisions of judges and magistrate judges of the United States not to recuse themselves from cases; 

Whereas litigants can seek legal recourse through the United 

States courts to enforce section 455 of title 28, United 

States Code, and challenge the disposition of the underlying case, and complainants have administrative procedures under chapter 16 of title 28, United States Code, 

against a judge or magistrate judge of the United States, 

but there are no comparable enforcement mechanisms 

against the justices of the United States; 

Whereas the Judicial Conference of the United States adopted a Code of Conduct for United States Judges, which 

uses language identical to the relevant portion of section 

455 of title 28, United States Code, that a judge or magistrate judge of the United States must abide by when 

deciding whether to recuse himself or herself from a case, 

but the Code does not apply to a justice of the United 

States Supreme Court; 

Whereas justices of the United States Supreme Court are not 

bound by any written code of conduct; 

Whereas justices of the United States Supreme Court each 

have unreviewable authority to determine whether there 

is an appearance of bias, conflict of interest, or other ethical justification sufficient for withdrawal from hearing, 

partaking in deliberations in, or joining in the resolution 

of, a case or controversy; 

Whereas the Federal Judicial Center has concluded that ‘‘balancing the duty to decide’’ with ‘‘the duty to disqualify’’ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

HRES 624 IH 

precludes judges from using recusal as an excuse to shirk 

their duties by avoiding difficult or unpleasant cases; 

Whereas the United States Constitution vests judicial power 

in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the 

Congress may from time to time ordain and establish; 

Whereas the separation of powers of the coordinate branches 

of government, as well as the independence of the judiciary, or the appearance of independence, may be compromised by extensive legislative or executive interference 

into that branch’s functions; 

Whereas James Madison argued in Federalist Paper Number 

10 that ‘‘[n]o man is allowed to be a judge in his own 

cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity’’; and 

Whereas the United States Supreme Court has acknowledged 

in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, and reiterated in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., that ‘‘[t]he 

citizen’s respect for judgments depends . . . upon the 

issuing court’s absolute probity’’ and that ‘‘[j]udicial integrity is, in consequence, a state interest of the highest 

order’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the justices of the United States Su3 preme Court should make themselves subject to the exist4 ing and operative ethics guidelines set out in the Code of 

5 Conduct for United States Judges, or should promulgate 

6 their own code of conduct. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS