Money and Power in the US Supreme Court
Money and Power in the US Supreme Court
美國最高法院的金錢與權力
Introduction
New reports show how much money the Supreme Court judges have and what people think about them.
新報告顯示了最高法院法官擁有的財富以及大眾對他們的看法。
Main Body
Many people do not like the Court. A 2025 survey says 50% of Americans have a bad view of it. President Trump sometimes likes the Court and sometimes he does not.
許多人不喜歡這個法院。2025年的一項調查顯示，50% 的美國人對其評價不佳。川普總統有時喜歡這個法院，有時則不喜歡。
Judges get a salary from the government. They also make money from writing books and teaching at universities. Some judges have millions of dollars, but others have much less.
法官領取政府的薪資。他們也透過寫書和在大學任教來賺錢。有些法官擁有數百萬美元，但有些則少得多。
Some judges get expensive gifts and free travel. People are worried because there are no strong rules to stop this. This makes people ask if the judges are fair.
有些法官會收到昂貴的禮物和免費旅行。人們感到擔心，因為目前沒有強有力的規則來阻止這種行為。這使得人們質疑法官是否公正。
Judges have their jobs for life. They have police for protection and a good pension. They choose which legal cases they want to read and decide.
法官是終身職。他們有警察保護以及優渥的退休金。他們可以選擇想要審理並裁決的法律案件。
Conclusion
The Supreme Court has a lot of power and money, but many people do not trust them now.
最高法院擁有巨大的權力與財富，但現在許多人不信任他們。
Vocabulary Learning
⚡ The 'Power' of Some
In this text, we see a pattern: Some people do this, but Others do that. This is the best way to compare two different groups in A2 English.
Look at the pattern:
- Some judges have millions Others have much less.
How to use it:
- Some + [Group A] + [Action/Description]
- Others + [Action/Description]
Simple Examples for you:
- Some students like English. Others prefer math.
- Some cities are big. Others are small.
🛠️ Word Tool: "Have" vs "Get"
Notice how the text uses these two words for money:
- HAVE You already possess it. (They have millions of dollars)
- GET You receive it from someone else. (Judges get a salary)
Quick Tip: If it's a gift or a paycheck, use GET. If it's in your bank account, use HAVE.
Vocabulary Learning
Analysis of the Financial Reports and Public Standing of the US Supreme Court
美國最高法院財務報告與公眾地位分析
Introduction
Recent financial reports and public opinion data provide an overview of the assets, extra income, and public perception of the Supreme Court justices.
近期的財務報告與公眾輿論數據，概述了最高法院法官的資產、額外收入以及公眾對其的看法。
Main Body
The Court's current position is marked by a gap between public approval and judicial independence. A August 2025 Pew Research Center survey showed that about 50% of Americans have an unfavorable view of the institution, which is nearly the lowest rating in thirty years. Furthermore, the relationship between the executive branch and the judiciary has been unstable. For example, President Donald Trump has moved from criticizing the Court's decisions on tariffs to maintaining friendly relations, while the Court has issued a variety of different rulings on immigration and presidential power.
法院目前的處境在公眾認可度與司法獨立之間存在差距。2025年8月皮尤研究中心的一項調查顯示，約50%的美國人對該機構持有負面看法，這幾乎是三十年來的最低評分。此外，行政部門與司法部門之間的關係一直不穩定。例如，川普總統從最初批評法院對關稅的裁決，轉變為維持友好關係，而法院則針對移民與總統權力發布了多項不同的裁定。
Regarding income, justices receive fixed government salaries—$320,700 for the Chief Justice and $306,600 for associate justices—but they also earn significant money from other sources. The 2025 reports emphasize that writing books is the largest source of extra income. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson received a $1.18 million advance from a publisher, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett reported royalties of $849,071. Additionally, some justices earn money from teaching at universities, although this is usually limited to $30,000.
關於收入，法官領取政府固定薪金——首席大法官為320,700美元，聯席法官為306,600美元——但他們也從其他渠道獲得大量收入。2025年的報告強調，寫書是最大的額外收入來源。凱坦姬·布朗·傑克森法官收到出版商118萬美元的預付款，而艾美·康尼·巴雷特法官則申報了849,071美元的版權費。此外，部分法官透過在大學任教獲益，儘管這通常被限制在30,000美元以內。
Asset levels vary greatly among the justices. Chief Justice John Roberts reported the highest assets, estimated between $17.3 million and $60.9 million, whereas Justice Brett Kavanaugh reported the lowest, between $100,000 and $265,000. These reports also mention gifts and travel expenses, such as concert tickets received by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Consequently, there is more scrutiny of the Court's ethics because the 2023 Code of Conduct does not have a formal way to enforce its rules, leading to arguments over what counts as 'personal hospitality.'
法官之間的資產水平差異巨大。首席大法官約翰·羅伯茨申報的資產最高，估計在1,730萬至6,090萬美元之間，而布列特·卡法諾法官申報的最低，在10萬至26.5萬美元之間。這些報告還提到禮品與旅費，例如索尼亞·索托馬約法官收到的音樂會門票。因此，由於2023年的行為準則缺乏正式的執行機制，導致對於何謂「私人款待」產生爭議，使得法院的倫理操守受到更多審視。
Conclusion
The Supreme Court remains a powerful body with significant financial privileges, despite ongoing arguments about ethical transparency and a drop in public approval.
儘管倫理透明度持續存在爭議且公眾認可度下降，但最高法院仍是一個擁有顯著財務特權的權力機構。
Vocabulary Learning
⚡ The 'Contrast Bridge': Moving from Simple to Sophisticated
At the A2 level, you probably use 'but' for everything. To reach B2, you need to show the reader that you can connect complex ideas using contrast markers that vary in strength and position.
🔍 The Pattern Analysis
Look at how the text connects opposing ideas. It doesn't just say "A is true, but B is true." It uses a hierarchy of contrast:
-
The 'Soft' Contrast: *"...fixed government salaries... but they also earn significant money..."
- (A2 Style: Simple opposition)
-
The 'Comparative' Contrast: *"Chief Justice John Roberts reported the highest assets... whereas Justice Brett Kavanaugh reported the lowest..."
- (B2 Style: Used specifically to compare two different people or things side-by-side)
-
The 'Concession' Contrast: *"The Supreme Court remains a powerful body... despite ongoing arguments..."
- (B2 Style: Used to show that one fact does not stop another fact from being true)
🛠️ Upgrade Your Toolkit
| Instead of... | Try using... | When to use it |
|---|---|---|
| But | Whereas | When comparing two specific subjects (X is high, whereas Y is low). |
| But | Despite | When a problem exists, but the main situation stays the same. |
| And | Furthermore | When you want to add a stronger point to your argument. |
💡 Pro-Tip for Fluency
Notice how the text uses "Consequently". This is the 'Result Bridge.' Instead of saying "so," using Consequently at the start of a sentence signals to the listener that you are moving from a fact to a logical conclusion. This is a hallmark of B2 academic English.
Vocabulary Learning
Analysis of the Financial Disclosures and Institutional Standing of the United States Supreme Court
美國最高法院財務披露與體制地位分析
Introduction
Recent financial filings and public opinion data provide an overview of the fiscal assets, external income streams, and public perception of the Supreme Court justices.
近期的財務申報與公眾輿論數據，提供了最高法院法官的財務資產、外部收入來源及公眾看法的概況。
Main Body
The institutional standing of the Court is currently characterized by a divergence between public approval and judicial autonomy. A August 2025 Pew Research Center survey indicated that approximately 50% of the American populace maintains an unfavorable view of the institution, with favorability ratings approaching a thirty-year nadir. Concurrently, the executive branch has exhibited a volatile relationship with the judiciary; President Donald Trump has transitioned from criticizing the Court's rejection of emergency tariffs to maintaining cordial diplomatic relations, while the Court has issued a heterogeneous series of rulings regarding immigration, presidential authority, and electoral procedures.
目前法院的體制地位其特徵在於公眾認同度與司法自主性之間存在分歧。2025年8月皮尤研究中心的一項調查顯示，約有 50% 的美國民眾對該體制持負面看法，支持率接近三十年來的最低點。同時，行政部門與司法部門的關係十分波動；川普總統已從批評法院拒絕緊急關稅，轉而維持良好的外交關係，而法院則在移民、總統權限及選舉程序方面發布了一系列迥異的裁決。
Fiscal remuneration for the justices is structured around fixed government salaries—$320,700 for the Chief Justice and $306,600 for associate justices—supplemented by substantial external revenue. The 2025 financial disclosures reveal that literary endeavors constitute the most significant source of non-governmental income. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson reported a $1.18 million advance from Penguin Random House, while Justice Amy Coney Barrett disclosed royalties totaling $849,071. Additional income is derived from academic appointments, with several justices reporting earnings from institutions such as the University of Notre Dame and George Mason University, typically constrained by a $30,000 cap on teaching compensation.
法官的財政報酬是以政府固定薪金為基礎——首席大法官 320,700 美元，聯席法官 306,600 美元——並輔以可觀的外部收入。2025 年的財務披露顯示，文學創作是非政府收入最顯著的來源。Ketanji Brown Jackson 法官申報了由 Penguin Random House 提供的 118 萬美元預付款，而 Amy Coney Barrett 法官則披露版稅總計 849,071 美元。額外收入源自學術任職，數名法官申報了來自聖母大學和喬治梅森大學等機構的收入，通常受限於 3 萬美元的教學補償上限。
Asset distribution among the justices varies considerably. Chief Justice John Roberts reported the highest disclosed asset range, estimated between $17.3 million and $60.9 million, primarily through diversified investment funds. Conversely, Justice Brett Kavanaugh reported the most limited holdings, ranging from $100,000 to $265,000. These disclosures also highlight the receipt of gifts and reimbursed travel, such as Justice Sonia Sotomayor's receipt of concert tickets valued at $4,333 from Rimas Entertainment. Such disclosures have intensified scrutiny regarding the Court's ethical framework, particularly since the 2023 Code of Conduct lacks a formal enforcement mechanism, leaving the interpretation of 'personal hospitality'—as cited by Justice Clarence Thomas regarding undisclosed travel—as a point of contention.
法官之間的資產分佈差異顯著。首席大法官 John Roberts 申報的資產範圍最高，估計在 1,730 萬至 6,090 萬美元之間，主要透過多元化投資基金達成。相反，Brett Kavanaugh 法官申報的持有資產最少，範圍在 10 萬至 26.5 萬美元之間。這些披露也凸顯了收受禮物與報銷旅費的情況，例如 Sonia Sotomayor 法官收到了 Rimas Entertainment 價值 4,333 美元的音樂會門票。此類披露加劇了對法院倫理框架的審查，特別是 2023 年的行為準則缺乏正式的執行機制，使得對「私人款待」的解釋（如 Clarence Thomas 法官就未披露旅費所引用的說法）成為爭論焦點。
Beyond financial metrics, the position is defined by significant professional security and autonomy. Lifetime appointments, coupled with lifetime US Marshal protection and pensions matching final salaries, ensure high institutional stability. The justices maintain substantial control over their judicial workload, reviewing only a small fraction of the thousands of cases submitted annually, thereby exercising discretionary power over the interpretation of the Constitution.
除財務指標外，該職位的定義還在於極高的專業保障與自主權。終身制的任命，加上終身的美國法警保護以及與最終薪金相匹配的退休金，確保了體制的高度穩定。法官對其司法工作量擁有實質掌控權，在每年提交的數千宗案件中僅審理極小部分，從而對憲法的解釋行使酌情權。
Conclusion
The Supreme Court remains a body of significant legal influence and financial privilege, despite ongoing debates regarding ethical transparency and declining public approval.
儘管對於倫理透明度與公眾認同度下降仍有爭論，最高法院依然是一個具有重大法律影響力與財政特權的機構。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of 'Institutional Distance'
To transition from B2 to C2, a student must move beyond meaning and begin analyzing register and tonal orchestration. This text is a masterclass in Clinical Detachment, a linguistic strategy where the author employs highly formalized, Latinate vocabulary to neutralize emotionally charged or politically volatile topics.
1. Lexical Displacement
Notice how the author avoids common verbs and adjectives in favor of nominalizations and precision-engineered terms. This is not merely 'fancy' writing; it is the deliberate removal of the author's persona to create an aura of objective authority.
- The B2 approach: "The people don't like the Court as much as they used to."
- The C2 approach: "...favorability ratings approaching a thirty-year nadir."
Analysis: The word nadir (the lowest point) is mathematically and astronomically precise. Using it transforms a social trend into a measurable data point, stripping away the 'opinion' and replacing it with 'observation'.
2. The 'Heterogeneous' Spectrum
C2 mastery involves using adjectives that describe the nature of a set rather than the quality of the items.
*"...the Court has issued a heterogeneous series of rulings..."
By choosing heterogeneous over diverse or mixed, the author signals a scholarly distance. Heterogeneous implies a fundamental difference in kind or composition, suggesting that the rulings are not just different, but potentially contradictory or disparate in their legal logic.
3. Syntactic Buffering
Observe the phrase: "...leaving the interpretation of 'personal hospitality'... as a point of contention."
Instead of saying "People argue about what 'personal hospitality' means," the author uses a complex noun phrase as a subject. This is 'buffering'. It allows the writer to present a conflict without assigning blame or taking a side, which is the hallmark of high-level academic and diplomatic English.
C2 Pivot Point: To replicate this, replace active agent-driven sentences (People think X) with state-driven constructions (The perception of X remains a point of contention).