WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Monday the adoption of its first formal code of conduct, addressing ethical behavior for its nine justices. The move comes in response to months of outside pressure following revelations of undisclosed luxury trips and interactions with wealthy benefactors.

The newly implemented code, however, drew mixed reviews, with critics highlighting the lack of an enforcement mechanism. The decision to adopt the code came after several media reports shed light on ethics questions surrounding certain Supreme Court members, particularly conservative Justice Clarence Thomas. Senate Democrats had also been pushing for legislation to enforce an ethics code for the country's highest judicial body.

The nine-page code includes sections outlining guidelines for justices to avoid letting outside relationships influence their official conduct or judgment. It also sets restrictions on fundraising participation and emphasizes limits on the acceptance of gifts. Additionally, the code states that justices should refrain from using judicial resources or staff extensively for non-official activities.

A commentary accompanying the code elaborated on some of its provisions. It advised justices to consider whether accepting speaking engagements would create an appearance of impropriety in the eyes of the public.

Unlike other federal judges, who have long been subject to binding ethics codes, the Supreme Court's life-tenured justices had operated without such constraints. The court stated that the absence of a code had led to misconceptions that the justices considered themselves exempt from ethics rules.

In response to the code, Senator Dick Durbin, chair of the Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee, viewed it as a "step in the right direction." However, Durbin did not rule out potential legislative efforts should the code fall short of the ethical standards upheld by other federal judges.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, also a Democrat, regarded the code as an "important first step." However, he expressed concerns about the lack of enforcement measures if any justice were to ignore the code.

Critics disputed whether the code would satisfy Senate Democrats, with some suggesting their focus on ethics aimed to intimidate a court that they deemed unfaithful to the Constitution.

The ethics controversies have put additional pressure on a court already facing declining public approval following recent rulings made by its conservative majority. These rulings include ending the recognition of a constitutional right to abortion, expanding gun rights, and rejecting affirmative action collegiate admissions policies.

Legal ethics experts acknowledged the court's move to address public demands for an ethics code but flagged certain shortcomings. A notable concern was the court's decision to allow the justices themselves to determine whether recusal from a case is necessary, raising concerns about potential bias.

There remains speculation over whether this action by the court is merely a response to external pressures or signifies a commitment to actively embrace and enhance the code, similar to how other courts have applied and revised their respective codes.

Revelations of undisclosed luxury trips, real estate transactions, and private jets provided to the justices have further exacerbated concerns about the court's ethical standards. Reports included details of trips provided to Justice Thomas by Texas businessman Harlan Crow, as well as real estate transactions involving Thomas and a prominent Republican donor. There were also reports of Justice Samuel Alito's undisclosed flight on a private jet provided by billionaire hedge fund founder Paul Singer for a luxury fishing trip in Alaska.

As the U.S. Supreme Court takes this step to establish a code of conduct, it remains to be seen how it will be implemented and whether it will address the concerns raised by both critics and supporters.