A trove of previously confidential documents has ignited fresh controversy over the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s behind-the-scenes role in ensuring the Supreme Court heard a case involving former Vice President Dick Cheney — revelations that cast new light on one of the most ethically fraught episodes in modern Supreme Court history. The newly released materials were published by CNN on June 1, 2026, arriving seven months after Cheney’s death.
The documents, drawn from the private papers of the late Justice John Paul Stevens, show that Scalia actively lobbied his colleagues in late 2003 to reverse course and agree to hear Cheney’s appeal in the energy task force case, even though the court had been poised to reject it entirely. Within three weeks of the court’s decision to take the case, Scalia joined Cheney on a private duck hunting trip in Louisiana, sparking what would become one of the most enduring judicial ethics controversies in recent memory.
A Case Built on Secrecy
The controversy dates back to 2001, when then-Vice President Dick Cheney chaired the National Energy Policy Development Group, a White House task force whose meetings with energy industry lobbyists became the subject of intense public and legal scrutiny. The Sierra Club and Judicial Watch sued to compel the release of records revealing who participated in those closed-door sessions. Cheney and the Bush administration fought back, arguing the case violated the constitutional separation of powers.
What makes the Stevens documents particularly significant is that Scalia’s advocacy preceded the court’s decision to grant review entirely. The Sierra Club formally requested Scalia’s recusal, arguing his impartiality had been irreparably compromised. Scalia refused in a defiant 21-page memorandum, insisting the two men had never discussed the case and were never alone together during the trip.
The court ultimately ruled largely in Cheney’s favor in June 2004, allowing the administration to keep the task force’s internal deliberations secret.
The Ethics Question Lives On
The CNN report rekindles a debate that Supreme Court ethics reform advocates have long pointed to as a cautionary tale. The new Stevens documents suggest the Scalia-Cheney relationship was not merely a friendship that happened to overlap with a pending case — it was a friendship that actively shaped whether the case would be heard at all.
Stephen Gillers, a New York University ethics professor who criticized Scalia at the time, told CNN the new documents deepened his concerns. “The more influential he is on behalf of Cheney’s interests, given Cheney’s governmental and personal interests in the case, and Scalia’s friendship, and the timing of the trip, it makes the Scalia activity behind the scenes all the more reprehensible,” Gillers said.
A Legacy Revisited
Richard B. Cheney, the 46th vice president of the United States, died on Nov. 3, 2025, at the age of 84, surrounded by his family at home. His family confirmed the cause as complications of pneumonia and cardiac and vascular disease — a fitting if sobering end for a man who had survived five heart attacks over the course of his life and received a heart transplant in 2012.
His death prompted an outpouring of tributes that captured the paradox of his public life. Former President George W. Bush, for whom Cheney served two terms beginning in 2001, said in a statement released upon Cheney’s death that the loss was “a loss to the nation and a sorrow to his friends,” describing Cheney as “among the finest public servants of his generation — a patriot who brought integrity, high intelligence, and seriousness of purpose to every position he held.” Bush delivered a eulogy at the funeral service held at Washington National Cathedral on Nov. 20, 2025, where former President Joe Biden and other living vice presidents gathered in tribute. Notably absent were President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, who had not been invited.
The estrangement between Cheney and Trump had been years in the making — and it ended with one of the most stunning crossover endorsements in modern American political history. In October 2024, Cheney publicly endorsed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris for president, declaring that Donald Trump posed a threat to the Constitution and the rule of law.
Although Cheney died in 2025 and Scalia died in 2016, the questions raised by their once-private relationship continue to echo through the institution whose legitimacy depends on the public’s belief that its doors are not opened by friendship. A Navigator Research survey found that 74% of Americans support term limits for Supreme Court justices, and 70% back congressional investigations into potential ethics violations — both with bipartisan support.
For a court that has faced renewed ethical scrutiny in recent years over undisclosed gifts and relationships between justices and wealthy benefactors — and where all six conservative justices attended President Trump’s April 2026 state dinner for King Charles III, drawing fresh criticism from ethics advocates — the revelation is a timely reminder that the tension between personal ties and judicial impartiality is not a new problem.