Posted on: Saturday, January 8, 2005

EDITORIAL
Federal courts need tighter ethics laws

It may temper things slightly to understand that nearly half of the $42,000 in gifts and freebies received by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas came in the form of a Bible valued at $19,000.

It seems unlikely that Thomas' judicial independence would be swayed by a Bible, no matter how old or how valuable. Still, it is interesting to note that the Bible, once owned by Frederick Douglass, came from a Texas Republican who was also a major supporter of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."

But the shower of gifts that Thomas reports having accepted between 1998 and 2003 (the only period covered by public disclosure forms) suggests a strong need to rewrite ethics laws covering the federal judiciary.

Federal ethics laws generally prohibit any federal employee, including judges, from accepting "anything of value" from a person with official business before them.

The federal judiciary has neatly twisted this law to say it is OK for judges to accept gifts of any value, so long as the donor of the gift doesn't have business before the court at the time the gift was given.

That's a mighty thin veil to hide behind.

Now, Thomas might recuse himself if and when one of his gift-giving friends ever appear before the Supreme Court.

Perhaps. But a much more straightforward approach would be to take the federal ethics law at its meaning and simply decree that sitting judges should no accept gifts of value from anyone. Period.