Sex, Lies and Secrets: A Federal Judge’s Trysts Go Public; The New York Times, June 11, 2026

 Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs and Mattathias Schwartz, The New York Times; Sex, Lies and Secrets: A Federal Judge’s Trysts Go Public

"The ensuing investigative report is a chronicle of sex, lies and ethical breaches, much of which is cloaked in secrecy because America’s federal court system affords judges broad deference."

Supreme Court adopts automated recusal software to avoid ethics conflicts; CNN, February 17, 2026

 Tierney Sneed, CNN; Supreme Court adopts automated recusal software to avoid ethics conflicts

"The Supreme Court said Tuesday that it will start using software to assist in justices’ decisions to recuse themselves from cases that present a potential conflict of interest.

A brief press release issued by the court described an electronic matching process already used by some lower courts to compare a case’s parties to lists judges assemble of individuals and organizations they have ties to. A 2023 code of conduct statement from the justices said they were considering adopting such a tool themselves.

“This software will be used to run automated recusal checks by comparing information about parties and attorneys in a case with lists created by each Justice’s chambers,” the press release said. “The system was designed and created by the Court’s Office of Information Technology in cooperation with the Court’s Legal Office and Clerk’s Office.”"

How the Supreme Court Secretly Made Itself Even More Secretive; The New York Times, February 2, 2026

 Jodi Kantor, The New York Times ; How the Supreme Court Secretly Made Itself Even More Secretive

Amid calls to increase transparency and revelations about the court’s inner workings, the chief justice imposed nondisclosure agreements on clerks and employees.

"n November of 2024, two weeks after voters returned President Donald Trump to office, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. summoned employees of the U.S. Supreme Court for an unusual announcement. Facing them in a grand conference room beneath ornate chandeliers, he requested they each sign a nondisclosure agreement promising to keep the court’s inner workings secret.

The chief justice acted after a series of unusual leaks of internal court documents, most notably of the decision overturning the right to abortion, and news reports about ethical lapses by the justices. Trust in the institution was languishing at a historic low. Debate was intensifying over whether the black box institution should be more transparent.

Instead, the chief justice tightened the court’s hold on information.Its employees have long been expected to stay silent about what they witness behind the scenes. But starting that autumn, in a move that has not been previously reported, the chief justice converted what was once a norm into a formal contract, according to five people familiar with the shift."

Alaska judges will soon be bound by tighter ethics rules under a rewrite of court standards; Alaska Beacon, January 8, 2026

 JAMES BROOKS, Alaska Beacon ; Alaska judges will soon be bound by tighter ethics rules under a rewrite of court standards

"The Alaska Court System is preparing to finalize new ethics guidelines that will determine whether state judges must opt out from hearing cases due to personal conflicts.

An extensive new ethics code, modeled on a national standard drafted by the American Bar Association, is open for public comment through Jan. 23. 

The changes, which stretch for dozens of dense, jargon-filled pages, prescribe things like what a judge can ethically do during an election, how to respond if someone’s life might be endangered by secrecy and even what happens if an attorney is drunk in the courtroom...

Alaska’s existing code of ethics dates to 1998 and was based on a model released in 1990 by the American Bar Association.

The association released a new model code in 2007, but Alaska didn’t adopt it. In 2018, as the court system dealt with a rising number of Alaskans representing themselves in court, judges were struggling with what they could and couldn’t do to help, Winfree said."

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts gives an incomplete history lesson on judicial ethics; NBC News, January 4, 2022

Steven Lubet, Williams Memorial Professor at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, NBC News ; Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts gives an incomplete history lesson on judicial ethics

In his end of the year report, Roberts' argument for the court's independence from oversight omitted a key part of its history.

"His comments come amid increased calls for the Supreme Court to be subject to a code of ethics, like all other U.S. courts. As chief justice, though, Roberts has consistently defended the court’s refusal to adopt one, rejecting all suggestions of congressional or other oversight. His referring to Taft’s support for judicial independence seems to bolster that argument. But the story Roberts presented is oddly incomplete, omitting a crucial aspect of Taft’s legacy: Taft also believed that judges should be accountable for their conduct according to ethical standards developed outside the judiciary – a proposition that Roberts has politely but firmly rejected...

Another financial scandal, resulting in the resignation of Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas in 1969, spurred the ABA to re-examine the by-then-antiquated canons. The ABA promulgated the much-strengthened Code of Judicial Conduct in 1972. The Judicial Conference of the United States, with authority over the lower federal courts, officially adopted the code in 1973, as did every state judiciary in the following years. Though the code itself doesn’t include penalties, violations can lead to discipline in some circumstances.

That progress stopped at the Supreme Court steps. The Supreme Court has declined for over 50 years to adopt the Judicial Conference code, or any other, making it the only court in the U.S.without a formal set of ethics rules."