Justices teach when the Supreme Court isn’t in session. It can double as an all-expenses-paid trip

For many years, the University of Hawaii’s law school has been presenting its Jurist-In-Residence program as an attractive, fully-funded retreat to members of the Supreme Court, offering substantial leisure time in a beautiful setting.

This initiative has seen active participation from various justices.

In an attempt to persuade Justice Sonia Sotomayor to visit in 2010, the then-Dean Aviam Soifer highlighted the positive experiences of former visitors Justices Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer, promising comprehensive coverage of travel costs including first-class airfare and superior hotel accommodations.

The program, however, is not without its ethical complexities, as documented by the AP. These include interactions between justices and donors during campus visits, raising questions about the integrity of the Court’s ethics practices. Notably, Justice Sotomayor’s staff has shown a reluctance to engage with donors.

While teaching is promoted within the program to demystify the Supreme Court and expose justices to diverse audiences, it often involves global travel during court breaks. This is permissible as long as earnings don’t exceed the Court’s $30,000 limit on external income.

The Supreme Court, in a statement, outlined the rules governing such teaching assignments, which must be pre-approved by the Chief Justice or the Associate Justices in the case of the Chief Justice’s own teaching.

However, public records requests by The Big Big News have uncovered that some of these trips, which include destinations like Italy, Iceland, and Hawaii, often involve minimal classroom time and substantial periods for personal leisure.

A 2018 syllabus for a class taught by Justice Neil Gorsuch in Italy exemplifies this trend. Both Gorsuch and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, after their appointments, joined George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia School of Law, teaching courses abroad with limited classroom hours, thus allowing time for personal activities.

These arrangements coincide with substantial donations to the law school, including a notable $20 million from an anonymous donor contingent on renaming the school after Scalia and expanding the faculty. The Charles Koch Foundation also contributed $10 million. School officials assert that these donations did not influence hiring decisions.

Justice Gorsuch’s teaching engagements in Padua, Italy, and other locations have been funded by the university, covering travel and accommodation costs. Similarly, Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett have taught abroad through programs like the University of Notre Dame’s London Law Program.

These circumstances, often kept private due to the nature of the institutions involved, have sparked debate about the ethical implications of such programs, with some critics arguing that the luxuries afforded to the justices may cross ethical boundaries.

For more detailed coverage on this topic, the AP’s dedicated section on the U.S. Supreme Court can be accessed at their official website.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Supreme Court Ethics

More about Supreme Court Ethics

• University of Hawaii Jurist-In-Residence Program
• Ethical Concerns in Supreme Court Justices’ Activities
• Supreme Court Justices’ Outside Income Limits
• Donor Interactions with Supreme Court Justices
• Supreme Court’s Teaching Assignments Rules
• Investigations into Supreme Court Ethics Practices