shouldn't be putting money into the pockets of people on the court. Yes, Thomas knows what Leonard Leo thinks on matters. But he also hangs out with Leonard Leo and chats with him and his wife does business with him. We have no way of knowing what they talk about. There's literally nothing other than our trusting their word to say that he isn't advising Leo on how to put cases together that will win the votes of 4 other justices. We know that Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow have repeatedly funneled money, travel, and gifts to the Thomas family. Those folks all just happen to be friends, business associates, and have a strong interest in what goes on with the Supreme Court?

The appearance of impropriety matters here when the court is responsible for making judgements that affect all aspects of American life and government. It's what every government agency's ethics guidelines are based on. DOJ's were just the most convenient, but why is it ok for a Supreme Court justice to abide by less stringent ethical standards than a civil servant in DOJ? That's the point of my questions from before.

Quite frankly, if I were ethics czar, my standards would amount to basically a vow of poverty (i.e. an upper middle class existence) for all political actors and federal judges. No books, no paid lectures, no outside business, no gifts, no free travel. Spouses have to take very clear steps to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest. We'll pay you a handsome salary, but you can't make money in any way that gives even the slightest hint that you are financially benefiting from your position. That's the standard that civil servants live by every day, but we somehow expect less from politicians and Supreme Court justices.