Chief Justice Roberts the Target of a Bold Challenge Over SCOTUS Ethics Probe
Trump-Aligned Group is initiating the lawsuit
via and all rights belong to Resist the Mainstream
A conservative legal organization founded by former Trump White House aide Stephen Miller has filed a federal lawsuit against Chief Justice John Roberts, alleging constitutional overreach tied to recent congressional ethics investigations into the Supreme Court.
The America First Legal Foundation (AFL) filed the lawsuit against Roberts in his official role as head of the U.S. Judicial Conference, as well as against Robert Conrad, the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
The suit accuses both of overstepping their judicial roles by taking administrative actions that AFL claims are beyond the bounds of the judiciary, Fox News reports.
The case, now assigned to U.S. District Judge Trevor N. McFadden — a Trump appointee — challenges what AFL describes as unconstitutional cooperation between the Judicial Conference and Congress.
According to Just the News, the legal complaint centers on the bodies’ role in assisting congressional efforts to investigate Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito over alleged ethics violations.
The investigation has become a contentious issue, as it involves accusations of judicial conflicts of interest, prompting calls for a code of ethics to govern Supreme Court justices.
AFL alleges that by aiding Congress and working to develop a code of ethics for the Supreme Court, the Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are effectively performing executive branch duties.
“Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch,” AFL argued.
Based on this position, AFL contends these judicial agencies should be classified as executive in nature and therefore subject to oversight by the president and public transparency laws, such as the Freedom of Information Act.
“The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies,” AFL stated in the complaint, as reported by Just the News.
AFL is seeking to compel the disclosure of records held by the Judicial Conference, arguing they fall under FOIA because the agencies perform regulatory or policymaking functions unrelated to adjudicating legal disputes.
The Judicial Conference serves as the policymaking arm of the federal judiciary and is led by the chief justice.
It typically offers biannual recommendations to Congress.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts operates under the Judicial Conference’s supervision and handles non-judicial responsibilities such as budget planning, court data management, and logistical support for the federal judiciary, according to Fox News.
AFL attorney Will Scolinos argued the Judicial Conference’s involvement in ethics oversight reflects executive authority, which courts are not permitted to exercise.
“Courts definitively do not create agencies to exercise functions beyond resolving cases or controversies or administratively supporting those functions,” the complaint states, according to the outlet.
Scolinos added that placing these functions under presidential oversight would preserve the constitutional separation of powers.
“This framework preserves the separation of powers but also keeps the courts out of politics,” he stated.
The lawsuit represents a broader effort by Trump-aligned groups to counter judicial and legislative scrutiny of Supreme Court justices.
While legal experts view the suit as a long shot, AFL has signaled its intention to test the limits of judicial authority and press for greater transparency in the high court’s administrative dealings.