On April 22, 2026, independent journalist Christopher Armitage published an article on his Substack, The Existentialist Republic, with a headline claiming that U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and his
The allegation spread on social media, where many expressed outrage at John Roberts' supposed behavior. Snopes readers searched the site hoping to find more information about the claim.
Under the 1978 Ethics in Government Act, Supreme Court justices (and many other public officials) are required to disclose their personal finances on a yearly bases, including income earned by their spouses totaling more than $1,000. However, the law only requires officials to disclose the source of their spouse's income, not the amount.
As such, there is limited available information about how much Jane Roberts made in commission, meaning Snopes cannot rate the claim that the couple took more than $20 million from these firms. In order to do so, we would need to view and authenticate financial documents or detailed disclosures of the Roberts' finances, then determine how much of that money came specifically from law firms that had business with the Supreme Court.
Armitage's headline claimed that both John and Jane Roberts took money from law firms he ruled on. This was the version of the claim that spread on social media and that Snopes readers wrote in to request we investigate. However, Armitage did not use that exact language in the body of his article, which instead claimed that Roberts mischaracterized his wife's income as salary instead of as commission.
It is misleading to say that John and Jane Roberts both took money from law firms. Many married couples do combine their finances, but it is worth noting that John Roberts was not taking commissions from law firms himself. Jane Roberts was the only one earning this money, as part of her role as a legal recruiter.
According to 2023 reporting from Business Insider, The New York Times and Politico, Jane Roberts switched careers from practicing law to legal recruiting once her husband took his seat on the Supreme Court bench. She took a position with the firm Major, Lindsey & Africa in 2007 and worked there as a recruiter until 2019, when she left for the firm Macrae's Washington, D.C., office, where she is currently a partner.
Armitage's total is partially based on a 2022 whistleblower report that Kendal B. Price, a former colleague of Jane Roberts at Major, Lindsey & Africa, filed. In the report, Price alleged that a colleague told him Jane Roberts was "the highest earning recruiter in the entire company 'by a wide margin.'" His complaint contained a spreadsheet alleging that Major, Lindsey & Africa brought in $13.3 million between 2007 and 2014, and that $10.3 million went to Jane Roberts in the form of commissions.
Price claimed that Jane Roberts helped at least one prominent government official, then-outgoing Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, land a position at WilmerHale, a law firm with a large Supreme Court presence. "I cannot rule out that more than one law firm that paid commissions to Ms. Roberts argued cases at the Supreme Court," he said.
Between 2007 and 2020, John Roberts' financial disclosures included spousal income from Major, Lindsey & Africa, all described as "attorney search consultants."
Between 2007 and 2014, then again in 2018 and 2019, John Roberts' disclosures described his wife's income from Major, Lindsey & Africa as a salary. In 2020, he called it "compensation." He provided no further specification between 2015 and 2017. Price claimed John Roberts' disclosure was improper, because Jane Roberts took commission based on her placements, not a salary.
Armitage arrived at the final $22 million figure by estimating that between 2015 and 2022, Jane Roberts made an additional $11.8 million in commission, arguing that the final sum was "likely substantially higher given Macrae's reported revenue growth during that period."
John Roberts' disclosures listed spousal income from Macrae between 2019 and 2025, again using the phrase "attorney search consultants." The disclosures described the income solely as a salary between 2019 and 2021, then as "recoverable base salary and commission" from 2022 to 2025.
A separate question is whether Jane Roberts' income from recruiting is legal or ethical. That depends on who you ask.
Armitage, and Price before him, claim that John Roberts should to recuse himself from cases involving firms his wife has placed clients at, citing federal law on the disqualification of judges, which include provisions saying that judges shall recuse themselves in situations where "he knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding."
Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the Supreme Court told The New York Times in 2023 that John Roberts had consulted the code of ethics on the situation and decided he did not need to recuse himself, citing a 2009 advisory opinion noting that "a judge whose spouse owned and operated a legal or executive recruitment business need not recuse merely because a law firm appearing before the judge engaged the judge's spouse, either currently or in the past."
Comments on Armitage's Substack post, and on social media posts spreading the claim, compared John Roberts' actions to those of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. ProPublica reported in 2023 that the two accepted vacations from Republican megadonors Harlan Crow and Paul Singer, respectively.