It’s interesting, but not sure it would mean much. If this had come up before her nomination, it might have made a difference. The charges, as I can see them, are addressing incidents that occurred from 2012 to 2020. I’m pretty sure there is some sort of statute of limitations for these things and this would make most of this meaningless. Additionally, it was from a time when she was a district court judge, not a SCOTUS justice.
All of these silly ethics claims on the SCOTUS justices don’t mean much if they aren’t acting unethically. For instance, if Justice Jackson was still benefitting from money her husband earns in medical malpractice cases and one of those cases came to the SCOTUS, she should recuse herself. If she did not, THEN there would be an actual case to be made that she was unethical.
Each of the justices are supposed to fill out forms identifying where they get income from. If it were found that one or more of them were purposely hiding things, knowing that they might hear a case on that, it would be unethical in my book. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS is the group that oversees the SCOTUS. If a justice brings an ethics charge against another justice, then there would be action.