Alito Gets Softball WSJ Interview With Attorney On Key Tax Case Before SCOTUS - TPM – Talking Points Memo

Justice Samuel Alito gave a softball interview published Friday to two WSJ writers, including one who is an attorney representing plaintiffs in a key case before the Supreme Court.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1464607

This sounds like a nicey-nice PR piece, rather than an opportunity to educate regarding the proper role of SCOTUS.

Does that make the WSJ article a thing of value?

24 Likes

I guess it will forever be a mystery who leaked the status of the Dobbs deliberations to the WSJ editorial board about a week and a half before Politico published the draft decision.

64 Likes

“He’s either tone deaf, or simply doesn’t give a damn about ethics and the appearance of conflict,” Rosenthal told TPM.

Both AND he’s actively laughing at Congress’ concerns about the Supreme Court’s lack of ethics standards and enforcement.

56 Likes

Lock him (and I am serious about this) up!

25 Likes

The column itself lavishes more than 2,400 words on Alito, praising him for a “candor that is refreshing and can be startling.”

I’m gonna go with “a brazen load of bullshit that is refreshing if you’ve bought yourself a SCOTUS, but can be startling.”

45 Likes

I’ll go with startling, but very little candor.

13 Likes

Charles Geyh, a law professor at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law, told TPM in an email that while judges and attorneys cannot discuss pending cases in conversations outside of the Court, nothing bars them from discussing other topics.

Well, maybe something should, especially for a SCJ.

Maybe, in echange for being a holy priest of the constitution, and all the extreme benefits that come with it, there should be some minor restrictions on who you can talk too, and when.

Most Americans aren’t giving interviews to the WSJ. Is it such an inconvenience for a mighty, brilliant, uberman SJC to not be able to do so with an interviewer who has a case before the court?

24 Likes

It’s never to early for a Chief Justice of SCOTUS to try to “put his thumb on the scale” when it’s only 15 months until a presidential election and a popular Democrat is the incumbent.

26 Likes

Would it be fair for me to describe Alito’s relationship with WSJ as “incestuous”?

I thought so, too.

54 Likes

He’s not even trying to pretend to follow any ethical guidelines whatsoever, is he?

64 Likes

Media may as well stop writing these types of stories. These judges have lifetime appointments, define their own ethics standards (not that they even meet those) and consider themselves above us, lowly citizens. All these stories do is piss us off and then nothing happens.

8 Likes

By the way, this:

is friggin’ disingenuous as all get-out. The “Necessary and Proper” clause that closes out Article I, Section 8 unquestionably gives Congress the authority to legislate the Supreme Court, as it has repeatedly done since the early days of the first Congress. To wit:

76 Likes

Always keep the pressure on.

14 Likes

“No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court — period.”

This is a radical, dangerous, and wrong understanding of law. I mean, it’s holy-shit-this-guy-is-crazy bad. Stated by a justice of the Supreme Court.

55 Likes

In normal society that may work but these assholes have become untouchable.

12 Likes

I’ll take “Supreme Court Corruption” for $1,000, Alex.

32 Likes

The rest of the court may speak up. It makes them look bad. Don’t despair.

8 Likes

Does ONE DAY go by where we don’t read a story that if a Democrat did it, there would be screaming outrage from all corners? One day? I know this has been going on since forever, but Jesus Christ, this unelected, smug, sanctimonious, ignorant asshole is too much to bear. At least Clarence keeps his mouth shut.

37 Likes

He has to or high end Burgundy would dribble down his chin.

11 Likes