Ketanji Brown Jackson slapped with ethics complaint over husband’s income


Group claims Supreme Court Justice omitted portions on husband’s income for years.
A conservative policy group filed an ethics complaint in the United States against Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Jackson, accusing him of “willfully” failing to disclose required income for many years during his tenure on federal benches.
The Center for Renewing America (a think tank headed by Russ Vought a former senior Trump White House Official) sent a letter with allegations to the Judicial Conference alleging that Jackson had “willfully” failed to disclose required information regarding her husband’s consulting income from malpractice for more than 10 years.
The letter suggests the Judicial Conference refer Jackson’s possible ethical violations to Attorney General Merrick Garrland for investigation and civil enforcement.
The letter states that federal judges must disclose “the source of any earned income received by a spouse in excess of $1,000 from anyone…except…if a spouse is self employed or has a profession or business, then only the nature or business of the business or profession should be disclosed.”
In her letter of nomination to the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia, Jackson revealed the names of the two clients of Dr. Patrick Jackson’s legal malpractice consulting firm who paid him more than $1,000 in 2011.
The letter states that Jackson, in subsequent filings “repeatedly failed” to disclose her husband’s income from consulting fees for medical malpractice.
The letter states that Justice Jackson admitted in her amended 2020 disclosure form, which she filed when nominated for the Supreme Court, “that some of my previous filed reports inadvertently left out” her husband’s income derived from “consulting on cases of medical malpractice.”
Vought writes in his letter that Jackson has “not even attempted to list” the years where her previous filed disclosures failed to include her husband’s income from consulting. In her amended 2020 disclosure form (filed 2022), Justice Jackson admitted only that “some” of her past disclosures were materially omitted.
Vought, the former head of the Office of Management and Budget under President Trump argues that Dr. Jackson’s income is not eligible for the “self-employment” exception. According to the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, Justice Jackson must identify “the source of any earned income received by a spouse of any person that exceeds $1,000.”
The former OMB head argues that Jackson’s actions are “willful” violations of law because she was aware enough of the 2012 requirements to list her specific sources of income in her first disclosure but did not do so in subsequent filings. She also admitted that some of her husband’s income was left out.
The letter says that there are reasons to believe that Justice Jackson did not disclose the private funding sources of the “massive celebration of her investiture at the Library of Congress”, in her latest financial disclosure.
After her appointment as the Supreme Court’s Justice in 2022, The Library of Congress held a huge event in her honour that featured performances from several musicians and groups including the Smithsonian Jazz Masterworks Quartet, and civil rights movement Freedom Singer Rutha Mae Harris.
The event is unclear about who paid. EIGA requires disclosure of any gift received over $415. EIGA defines a “gift” as a “payment, advance, forbearance or rendering of money or anything of value.”
Jackson’s disclosure from that year includes $1,200 worth of flowers from Oprah and a $6,580 designer jacket she wore for her Vogue photoshoot.
Vought stated that “Justice Jackson cannot claim ignorance about EIGA gift disclosure requirements and there is no real argument to the effect that this’massive concert featuring performances by many musicians and groups’ in celebration of her investiture, is not something of value.”
Vought says Jackson’s “disturbing” trend of “not reporting material sources and gifts of income or gifts to the public has shielded potential conflict of interest and undermined public, watchdog groups and party ability to scrutinize her decision.”
Fox News Digital contacted the Supreme Court Public Information Office but received no immediate response.
Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ketanji-brown-jackson-slapped-ethics-complaint-husbands-income