The 14 page outline does not acknowledge any of the myriad shortcomings and violations that investigations have found its members guilty of.  Instead, it blames the public’s “misunderstanding” for the bad press and low public approval of its last two years with statements like “To dispel this misunderstanding, we are issuing this code, which largely represents a codification of principles that we have long regarded as governing our conduct,” failing even to acknowledge any poor judgement, let alone wrongdoing. 

The ”code” also fails to mention any enforcement body or procedure, nor does it outline any set of punishments should these codes be violated.  What’s more, the language of the document is squishy at best, using phrases such as “to any substantial degree” in describing the limits of the justice’s ability to use resources or staff for non-official activities, without defining “substantial degree.”

Recusal from cases before the court for which any justice may harbor bias also remain up to the discretion of the justices, in spite of their repeated failure to do so in circumstances of obvious conflict of interest.  While they rarely recuse, they are also often vague about why they are doing so.  Often the implied reason has to do with stock holdings, which brings about another arm of corruption within the Court that mirrors conflicts of interest in Congress: In spite of their $285,400 taxpayer paid salary, Justices refuse to limit investments to only diversified mutual funds.