Do corporate amicus briefs pose a conflict for stockholding SCOTUS justices?
Image from Shutterstock.
When amicus briefs are submitted on behalf of companies, federal judges who own stock in those companies don’t have to recuse themselves. Supreme Court justices have also declined to step aside in those situations.
In 2014, three justices—Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Stephen G. Breyer—ruled in five cases in which they owned stock in companies that filed amicus briefs, the New York Times reports in a DealBook column.
A group called Fix the Court wants to address the issue by requiring justices to put their stock holdings in a blind trust. According to the group, in all five cases, the justices ruled in favor of the position of the company submitting the amicus briefs.
From 2009 to 2013, justices who owned stock in companies submitting amicus briefs ruled on behalf of the companies 68 percent of the time, according to Fix the Court. Its report is here (PDF).
Roberts, Breyer and Alito appear to be the only justices with substantial holdings in individual stocks.
See also:
ABAJournal.com: “Attack ads will target SCOTUS as ‘least accountable’ branch of government”
