Sunday Dialogue - How the Court Decides - NYTimes.com Should the justices take the effects on society into account? Those who criticize the Supreme Court for failing to take account of real-world effects usually just mean that its decisions do not conform to the critic's preferred political outcome. Mr. Margolis condemns the First Amendment ruling in Citizens United as ignoring the corrupting effects of money in politics. I wonder whether Mr. Margolis, a civil rights and employment lawyer, would similarly condemn Supreme Court rulings with other real-world effects: for example, decisions allowing employment lawsuits to proceed despite their costs for employers and ultimately consumers; procedural rulings that put dangerous people back on our streets; and decisions that have hampered the powers of government in detaining and investigating suspected terrorists. The Constitution does not perfectly reflect Mr. Margolis's own politics - or mine - and there will always be disagreement about whether real-world effects are desirable or not. It is therefore preferable for the court to stick to applying the law rather than trying to cater to one constituency or another. The writer is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law. We are a nation defined by the rule of law. To effectively uphold this fundamental American value, the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court must be above reproach. In recent years, some members of the Supreme Court have engaged in conduct that could be seen as undermining their impartiality. Unlike every other federal judge, Supreme Court justices have exempted themselves from the Code of Conduct for United States Judges - a binding code of ethics that ensures neutrality and transparency in our courts. As the court prepares to issue landmark decisions on gay marriage, affirmative action and voting rights that will directly affect broad swaths of the American public, we cannot afford to risk a further erosion of trust in this esteemed body's commitment to the rule of law. The highest court in the land should be bound by the highest ethical standards. We plan to introduce legislation to make that so. Ms. Slaughter is a Democratic representative from New York. Mr. Blumenthal and Mr. Murphy are Democratic senators from Connecticut.