S-1814 — Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025

YourVoice.Now Summary

Transparency & AccountabilityCivil Liberties

Requires a Supreme Court ethics code and lets outside judges review complaints against justices and requests to remove a judge.

Transparency & Accountability

Supreme Court ethics code — required within 180 days

The Supreme Court would have to write a code of conduct for justices within 180 days, after public comment. Other federal judges would get a new code on the same timeline.

Complaints against justices — reviewed by 5 randomly picked judges

Anyone could file a signed, sworn complaint that a justice broke the code or the law. Five top appeals judges, picked at random, could use subpoenas to look into it. They would post what they find unless they say to drop it.

Gift limits for justices — as strict as Congress's own rules

The Chief Justice's top aide would write gift and disclosure rules for justices and their law clerks. The rules must be at least as strict as the gift and disclosure rules for members of Congress.

Judges stepping aside — required if a party gave them gifts

A judge or justice would have to leave a case if they, their spouse, or minor child got gifts, income, or paid travel from a party. This covers the 6 years before the case through its end.

Judges stepping aside — required if a party backed their nomination

A judge would have to leave a case if a party lobbied or spent large sums to back the judge's nomination. The word lobbied here follows its meaning in federal lobbying law.

Requests to remove a judge — decided by outside judges

The judge must either step aside or send a party's sworn request to 3 judges from other courts, and the case pauses until they rule. For a justice, the rest of the Supreme Court decides.

Gifts to justices — parties must list them in court filings

Within 1 year, court rules would make each side and outside groups list gifts, pay, or paid trips they gave any justice from 2 years before the case to its end. They would also list money spent to back a justice's nomination.

Who pays for friend-of-court briefs — donors over $100,000 named

Anyone filing a friend-of-court brief would name who helped write it and anyone who gave over $100,000, or at least 3% of their yearly income, last year. The courts' main office would check this every year.

Court websites — must post each case a judge leaves

Each federal court would post a notice online when a judge leaves a case or a panel rules on a request to remove one. The notice must give each reason, with private details left out.

Civil Liberties

Donor privacy for groups filing court briefs — big donors named

Advocacy groups that file friend-of-court briefs would have to make public the names of their largest donors. Normal business sales and most investments are not counted.

More about this bill

If you have a case in federal court, you could ask to have your judge removed from it. The judge would have to step aside or send your request to 3 judges from other courts. The case would pause until they decide. For a Supreme Court justice, the other justices would decide. Judges would also have to step aside when a party in the case gave them gifts or income in the past 6 years. The same goes for a party that lobbied or spent large sums to back the judge's nomination. Judges would have to tell both sides right away about any possible conflict. Court websites would post each case a judge leaves, with the reasons. The Supreme Court would have to adopt a written code of conduct within 180 days, after public comment. Other federal judges would get a new code on the same timeline. Anyone could file a sworn complaint against a justice. Five chief judges of the appeals courts, picked at random, would review it. They could hold hearings and issue subpoenas. They would publish their findings unless they advise dropping the complaint. Justices and their law clerks would follow gift rules at least as strict as those for members of Congress. Groups that file friend-of-the-court briefs (amicus briefs) would have to name who helped write them. They would also name anyone who gave them more than $100,000 last year, or at least 3% of their yearly income. Parties would list gifts they gave any justice starting 2 years before the case. The courts would write rules to block or strike any brief that would force a judge off a case. For most households, nothing changes unless you are part of a federal court case.

Congressional Summary

Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2025 This bill makes various changes related to the ethical standards, financial disclosure requirements, and recusal requirements that apply to Supreme Court Justices. Among the changes, the bill requires the Supreme Court to adopt a code of conduct for Justices and establish procedures to receive and investigate complaints of judicial misconduct; adopt rules governing the disclosure of gifts, income, or reimbursements received by the Justices and law clerks that are at least as rigorous as the House and Senate disclosure rules; and establish procedural rules requiring each party or amicus to disclose any gift, income, or reimbursement provided to Justices. Additionally, the bill expands the circumstances under which a Justice or judge must be disqualified; and requires the Supreme Court and the Judicial Conference to establish procedural rules for prohibiting the filing of or striking an amicus brief that would result in the disqualification of a Justice, judge, or magistrate judge.

Details

Congress: 119th
Chamber: Senate
Status: summarized
Action: Introduced in Senate
Action Date: 2025-05-20
Date Added: 2026-10-08
Source: Congress.gov →

Like reading a bill in plain English?

We're building an app that does this for every bill in Congress and lets you tell your reps how you want them to vote. We're a small team getting ready to launch, and we're trying to show investors that real people want this. Be one of them. Help us get it built. Leave your email and we'll tell you the moment the app is ready.