> What I never see in any of these articles about justices getting favors or gifts or this and that is any link that influenced the outcome of a case. Ethical

> What I never see in any of these articles about justices getting favors or gifts or this and that is any link that influenced the outcome of a case. Ethical guidelines are established not just to prevent bribery and corruption, but also to prevent the appearance of bribery and corruption. Public faith in institutions, especially ones as powerful and far-reaching as SCOTUS, is important and shouldn't be brushed aside. As to the rest of your point - it's hard to disprove a negative. There have been justices that have 'evolved' or grown throughout their tenure - Roberts is a current example. The kind of social leverage that providing round trip flights on your private jet to view the unveiling of a portrait of yourself[1] can absolutely be applied to ensure adherence to 'predicted' outcomes of opinions. Kavanaugh has been the swing vote on several recent decisions, and the early leaking of the Dobbs draft opinion strongly implies the application of this kind of social pressure to a Justice like Kavanaugh. You may think this kind of herd-mentality extreme when it comes to such a vaunted position but the absolute requirement that conservative scotus nominees belong to the Federalist Society is just another example of this sad reality. [1] https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-billionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-bil...