Professor Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School lays out a detailed argument with the following objective: “The conservative constitutional narrative is deeply unprincipled and patently wrong, both in its defense of conservative judicial ideology and in its attack on what conservatives deride as a result-oriented “liberal” jurisprudence. In fact, most of the decisions the conservatives deride are premised on sound principles of constitutional interpretation and on the Framers’ own understanding of our Constitution and of the essential role of courts in our constitutional system.” Read more here.

A group of House Democrats are pushing for tougher ethics standards for Supreme Court justices. They want to hold the justices to the same high standards that apply to all other federal judges. It seems obvious that this proposal is a non-starter in the Republican-controlled House. But it does draw attention to the different standards that apply for the high court. Read more here including the letter proposal signed by 43 members.

Justice Clarence Thomas is co-teaching a constitutional law seminar at George Washington University Law School this semester. Thomas has partnered with Professor Gregory Maggs, who clerked for Thomas in the 1991 Term, Thomas’s first year on the bench. Read the full story here.

OpenSecrets.org has analyzed the justices’ most recent financial disclosure statements here. You can find the justices’ financial disclosure statements on their individual pages in Oyez through 2010, the most recent period available. The statements go back back several years.

OpenSecrets analyzed the 2009 statements and will release a similar comparative table of minimum, average, and maximum net worth later this year. It is unclear whether OpenSecrets relied on Justice Clarence Thomas’s original or amended statement, which addressed the matter of his wife’s income for the first time.