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.
Help us Prepare for Trump’s Day One
Trump is busy getting ready for Day One of his presidency – but so is Truthout.
Trump has made it no secret that he is planning a demolition-style attack on both specific communities and democracy as a whole, beginning on his first day in office. With over 25 executive orders and directives queued up for January 20, he’s promised to “launch the largest deportation program in American history,” roll back anti-discrimination protections for transgender students, and implement a “drill, drill, drill” approach to ramp up oil and gas extraction.
Organizations like Truthout are also being threatened by legislation like HR 9495, the “nonprofit killer bill” that would allow the Treasury Secretary to declare any nonprofit a “terrorist-supporting organization” and strip its tax-exempt status without due process. Progressive media like Truthout that has courageously focused on reporting on Israel’s genocide in Gaza are in the bill’s crosshairs.
As journalists, we have a responsibility to look at hard realities and communicate them to you. We hope that you, like us, can use this information to prepare for what’s to come.
And if you feel uncertain about what to do in the face of a second Trump administration, we invite you to be an indispensable part of Truthout’s preparations.
In addition to covering the widespread onslaught of draconian policy, we’re shoring up our resources for what might come next for progressive media: bad-faith lawsuits from far-right ghouls, legislation that seeks to strip us of our ability to receive tax-deductible donations, and further throttling of our reach on social media platforms owned by Trump’s sycophants.
We’re preparing right now for Trump’s Day One: building a brave coalition of movement media; reaching out to the activists, academics, and thinkers we trust to shine a light on the inner workings of authoritarianism; and planning to use journalism as a tool to equip movements to protect the people, lands, and principles most vulnerable to Trump’s destruction.
We’re asking all of our readers to start a monthly donation or make a one-time donation – as a commitment to stand with us on day one of Trump’s presidency, and every day after that, as we produce journalism that combats authoritarianism, censorship, injustice, and misinformation. You’re an essential part of our future – please join the movement by making a tax-deductible donation today.
If you have the means to make a substantial gift, please dig deep during this critical time!
With gratitude and resolve,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy