A major transparency bill passed the House Judiciary Committee unanimously in September, but it needs a little push to get it to the floor before the end of the year.
This is the third term in a row in which a justice has heard arguments in a case and then later realized he or she had a conflict that by law required a recusal. It's embarrassing, but there's a solution.
Stop the madness (and the proliferation of conflicts of interest)! Ask your representatives to require the justices to follow the same stock-ownership rules as members of Congress.