A former law clerk who worked under Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has condemned his decision to stay on cases relating to Donald Trump and defendants involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack, noting that two flags that flew outside of his homes demonstrate enough evidence to question his biases.
The New York Times reported last month that an upside-down United States flag flew outside of Alito’s home less than two weeks after the Capitol attack, and just days after Trump was impeached for his role in inciting it. The symbol is traditionally meant to signal distress, but has been used in recent decades as a sign of political discontent by numerous groups — at the time it was flying at Alito’s Virginia home, it was commonly used by those in support of Trump and his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election outcome.
Days after that initial report, The Times uncovered that a second flag flew at Alito’s vacation home in New Jersey. This time, it was the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, a symbol that was common during the Revolutionary War but rarely used since. The flag has been co-opted in the past decade by far right Christian nationalist groups, and was also prominent during the Capitol attack. It flew over the vacation home just last summer.
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned whether Alito should recuse himself over the flags, which could be viewed by some as a clear bias in favor of Trump and the Christian nationalists who attacked the Capitol. Despite legal experts saying otherwise, Alito rejected that notion by claiming “an unbiased and reasonable person” would accept his excuses, that it was his wife, not him, that flew the flags, and therefore he should continue to weigh in on those cases.
Susan Sullivan, who clerked under Alito and is currently a law professor at Temple University, said earlier this week that she was “aghast” when she saw news reports and images of Alito’s homes with these flags in front of them.
In a Wednesday interview on MSNBC, Sullivan said Alito’s actions — including his excuses and rationale for staying on the cases — contradicted her previous view of him being a “man of integrity.”
“It is irrelevant if Mrs. Alito flew it or not. The fact is that flag was there,” Sullivan said, referring specifically to the upside-down flag.
This is not an insignificant symbol. Irrespective of why it is there, who put it there — it shouldn’t have been there. The problem is that flag is incendiary, and it cannot do anything other than raise a reasonable inference of bias.
“[It is] the symbol of these people who attacked the Capitol,” Sullivan explained.
Alito should remove himself from the dockets, she added.
“The stakes have never been higher and recusal is, to me, it just defies logic that one would not recuse themselves from a case like this,” Sullivan said.
An analysis from The Washington Post also indicates that Alito’s excuses don’t add up.
For example, Alito claimed his wife had put up the flag “in response to a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs.” In a statement to Fox News, Alito added that the signage had also been too close to a school bus stop, further upsetting his wife.
But that point is rather moot, considering that school children had been staying home for months at that point due to the coronavirus pandemic. The spat between Martha-Ann Alito and the neighbor also did not occur until mid-February, according to that neighbor.
Critics responded to Alito’s refusal to recuse by blasting his inconsistencies.
“Justice Alito’s story conflicts with the accounts of other people involved, and the Supreme Court — uniquely in all of government — has no mechanism for getting to the truth. If the Court won’t create one, then we need to,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia, reached the same conclusion.
“I agree that Justice Alito’s wife has a First Amendment right to express her views. But if she does so on their shared property, in a way that would lead a reasonable person to question his impartiality, then he should respond by recusing himself,” Frost told the Times last week.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.