SCOTUS Justice Refuses to Recuse Himself Over 'Conflict of Interest'
Source: Daily Beast
Updated May 16 2026 4:10AM EDT
Published May 15 2026 6:20PM EDT
Conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has rebuffed calls to recuse himself from a major looming decision. A coalition of liberal groups asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to look into Alitos involvement in the case, which involves energy companies ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy as they look to throw out a Colorado lawsuit seeking damages for harms related to climate change. The left-leaning groups cite Alitos stock holdings in energy companies as the reason he should recuse himself.
But Alito, 76, is ignoring these calls, with a court spokesperson saying, Alito does not have a financial interest in any party involved in the case, and that his counsel has advised that his recusal is not required.
While Alito, a George W. Bush appointee, does not own stock in ExxonMobil or Suncor Energy, he did hold stock in oil companies ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66, as well as several other energy firms, according to his most recent financial disclosure report, which was filed last year.
The liberal groups have accused Alito of undermining public confidence in the impartiality of the court.. His irregular recusal practice in oil and gas industry-related cases is undermining public confidence in the impartiality of the Court. They could not occur were he compelled to adhere to enforceable ethics standards against adjudicating cases where he has financial interests or the appearance of a conflict of interest where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, the groups wrote.
Read more: https://www.thedailybeast.com/scotus-justice-samuel-alito-refuses-to-recuse-himself-over-conflict-of-interest-in-climate-case/
highplainsdem
(63,064 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(24,041 posts)We might not get enough votes in the senate for removal, but we sure as hell can investigate the shit out of his and Clarences finances next year.
Tben
(5 posts)The ethical lapses of a Supreme? Likely not even impeachable for Thomas (not treason, bribery or high crime or misdemeanor).
Fiendish Thingy
(24,041 posts)High crimes and misdemeanours do not refer to statutory violations of the criminal code.
Impeachment is a political, not legal, process, and high crimes and misdemeanours can be whatever congress says they are.
In the 19th century, judges were impeached for public drunkenness.
My point is, all this corruption can be presented at impeachment hearing next year, and Clarence and Alitos finances can be examined in open hearings, in public view.
Despite the futility of it, with no chance of removal, the hearings could raise public awareness of, and support for, court expansion in 2029.
RussBLib
(10,752 posts)...and it's not even a high-speed train because the US is too (insert reason) to build any high-speed rail.
snip
Yeah, a little late for that.
https://russblib.blogspot.com
OldBaldy1701E
(11,530 posts)(This has been going on long before that orange gibbon showed up.)
RainCaster
(13,886 posts)Just sayin