Let me stipulate: I do not agree with pseudo-journalistic cheating that surreptitiously records people, often public figures, in a cheating moment. It is unethical if the trapper is the extreme right Veritas Project or the left-leaning “defense journalist” who ensnared Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. and his wife, Martha-Ann, last week.
And yet…. The court's far-right judge did not have to respond as carelessly and wholly inappropriately as he did when Laura WindsorPosing as a fellow conservative Catholic, he approached her at the Supreme Court Historical Society's annual black-tie gala.
opinion columnist
Jackie Calmes
Jackie Calmes brings a critical look to the national political scene. He has decades of experience covering the White House and Congress.
No one made him accept, emphatically, that the nation must return “to a place of piety,” or that there really is no commitment to the left, as if he were a minister or a politician, not an impartial jurist.
As embarrassing as the Windsor recordings are for Alito, the audio made public on Monday doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know: the judge shows poor judgment and has a theocratic, right-wing bias that should be disqualifying if it weren't for the fact that he enjoys life tenure.
What's notable, however, is that Alito fell right into the trap just when you'd think he'd be more cautious, amid the ongoing furor over disclosures that flags favored by pro-insurrection, pro-Trump, and pro-Christian nationalist groups flew at the Alitos' homes in Virginia and New Jersey.
Lest anyone doubt that she could have avoided falling into Windsor's trap, she also harassed conservative Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. at the same elite event, and he answered with the judicial temperament that Alito lacks, impartially rejecting Windsor's main claims.
Still, Roberts doesn't get any pats. The chief justice presides over a court where for too long he has tolerated gift theftespecially by Justice Clarence Thomas and alito too. Lately he has tolerated the refusal of both magistrates to recuse of the rulings on Donald Trump's criminal responsibility, despite the obvious conflicts of interest arising from the actions of his pro-Trump spouses.
The new recordings almost certainly won't change Alito's refusal to recuse himself. Meanwhile, Roberts claims to be as powerless over Thomas and Alito (the justices decide whether to recuse themselves from a case) as Thomas and Alito profess to be over their partisan wives. I dont believe it.
The court, Alito and Roberts declined to comment on the recordings, first revealed in Rolling Stone. He Supreme Court Historical Societywhich hosted the gala, issued a statement that seems to confirm the authenticity of the audios: “We condemn the surreptitious recording of the judges at the event, which is inconsistent with the entire spirit of the evening.”
Ah yes, the spirit of the evening. It would be an unofficial intimacy between the justices and the society's wealthy donors, many of whom argue before the court or run businesses affected by the court's decisions. The society has been in the news before. In 2022 a former anti-abortion leader revealed who for years had pressured his wealthy supporters to join in and donate, to gain social access to judges, including Alito and his wife.
Windsor certainly had expanded access. When he suggested to Alito that the The right should not negotiate with the left, he agreed at some length. “One side is going to win,” she said, adding: “There may be a way to work, a way to live together in peace. But it is difficult, you know, because there are differences in fundamental aspects that cannot really be compromised.”
When she pressed the point, suggesting that people “who believe in God” must win “the moral argument” and “return our country to a place of godliness,” Alito quickly nodded: “Oh, I agree with you, I agree with you.” . “
Compare that to Roberts. He flatly rejected Windsor's claim that the court should lead the nation down a “moral path”: “That's for the people we elect.” And when she insisted, saying, “We live in a Christian nation,” Roberts rebutted: “I know a lot of Jewish and Muslim friends who would say maybe not. And it's not our job to do that. “Our job is to decide cases as best we can.”
I would ignore the almost six minute talk with Windsor (the lady is not justice), but for two points. First of all, she evidently shares her husband's opinion. hostility to gay rights: “I have to look across the pond at the Pride flag for the next month,” he complained. Which goes to the second point: Ms. Alito said she told her husband that she would raise an anti-gay flag in response “when she gets rid of this nonsense.”
So, I publish Serving on the highest court in the land is “nonsense.” I take his comment as confirmation that Alito, 74, is eager to resign if Trump wins the election. that's just one more reason to vote against the disgraced former president: we don't want a much younger version of Alito to replace him in the coming decades.
the partisan “stench” on the conservative supermajority court that liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned about in late 2021 is becoming increasingly stale. Last year, when Windsor similarly harassed Alito undercover, he told her that blamed to the media for having “really eroded confidence in the court” with its negative coverage.
Once again, justice demonstrates its bad judgment. The messenger is not the problem. He is.
@jackiekcalmes
