Adventures in morals & ethics: The US Supreme Court

In his usual to-the-point style, John Oliver summarized the state of ethics affairs at the US Supreme Court. By my reckoning, ethics are rules or laws that are supposed to apply to behaviors, but morals are personal traits that guide personal behavior. The two concepts often significantly overlap, but in my mind they are not identical. Sometimes they vary widely with limited overlap.  

From what I can tell, some Supreme Court justices have little regard for ethics because the ethics are optional for them. They face no repercussions for violating ethics rules. How justices behave in that unique, unrestrained situation reflects their morals, whatever they may be. One can form their own beliefs about how Supreme Court justice morals reflect on them as people in a position of high public trust and enormous power. In my opinion, one can even see their position on the core matter in American politics, kleptocratic authoritarianism vs democracy with less corruption.

By Germaine: Interested in morals and ethics, how powerful people deal with them, and what it says about them and their attitudes toward power