# Supreme Court Justices' Children's Books Draw Scrutiny Over Ethics and Conflicts

Two Supreme Court justices have authored or are affiliated with children's books, raising ethics questions about potential conflicts of interest and financial benefits tied to their judicial positions.

Justice Samuel Alito's wife received royalties from sales of "The Land of Lost Flags," a children's book published in 2020, according to financial disclosures. The book, which carries religious themes aligned with conservative viewpoints, generated income during years when Alito authored major opinions on constitutional issues affecting religious liberty and abortion rights. The connection between the book's subject matter and Alito's jurisprudence has prompted ethics experts to question whether the financial relationship presents an appearance of impropriety.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored "The Beloved World of Sonia Sotomayor," a memoir marketed toward young readers, published in 2013. Unlike Alito's situation, Sotomayor disclosed the book publicly and its educational focus differs substantially from pending litigation. Sotomayor's book focuses on her life story and path to the bench rather than constitutional interpretation.

The disclosure difference highlights broader ethics compliance issues at the Supreme Court. Unlike lower federal courts, the Supreme Court lacks a formal ethics code binding justices. Federal judges in district and circuit courts operate under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act and the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, which require disclosure of financial interests and restrict activities that create conflicts or appearance of impropriety.

Legal ethics scholars argue that the Court's absence of binding ethics rules creates ambiguity about disclosure obligations and permissible outside income. Some contend that any book royalties tied to a justice's prominence creates problematic incentives. Others note that memoir and educational works differ ethically from ideologically-driven publications potentially influencing a justice's decision