"A reasonable person who is not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to affect the outcome of Supreme Court cases would conclude that this event does not meet the applicable standard for recusal."
minute read
ADVERTISEMENT
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito told Congress on Wednesday that he will not recuse himself from cases involving former President Donald Trump or J6 cases, writing in a letter that no "reasonable person would conclude" that flying flags outside of his two homes would "meet the applicable standard for a recusal."
This is in response to a letter sent by top Senate Democrats to Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday, requesting a formal meeting to discuss Justice Alito's role in those cases following a media-made controversy regarding an American flag having flown upside down at his home and an Appeal to Heaven flag flown at his beach house. cases flag controversy. They demanded that Alito recuse himself from all Supreme Court cases involving J6 and Trump.
A recent New York Times hit piece on Justice Alito over two flags spotted outside his houses in Virginia and New Jersey, one an upside-down American flag in 2021 and the other an Appeal to Heaven flag in 2023, was what prompted the demand from the senators. Democratic lawmakers claimed that these two flags are "MAGA battle flags" that were used as symbols at "Stop the Steal" protesters.
In the letter sent to Democrat Senators Dick Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse, Justice Alito asserted he will not recuse himself from the requested cases and insisted that he had no involvement in flying the flags, stating that his wife put them up and her decision to do so is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
"As the Court has pointed out, '[i]ndividual Justices, rather than the Court, decide recusal issues.' I am therefore responding directly to your letter. In it, you claim that two incidents involving the flying of flags created an appearance of impropriety that requires my recusal," wrote Alito. "The two incidents you cite do not meet the condition for recusal."
"The first incident cited in your letter concerns the flying of an upside-down American flag outside the house in Virginia where my wife and I reside. In considering whether this event requires recusal, an unbiased and reasonable person would take into account the following facts. I was not even aware of the upside-down American flag until it was called to my attention. As soon as I saw it, I asked my wife to take it down, but for several days, she refused. My wife and I own our Virginia home jointly. She therefore has the legal right to use the property as she sees fit, and there were no additional steps that I could have taken to have the flag taken down more promptly," the Justice explained.
Justice Alito said that his wife's decision to fly the flag was over a "very nasty neighborhood" dispute in which one of their neighbors had displayed a sign attacking her personally, and a man living at the home followed her down the street and berated her while screaming foul language at her. She flew the flag as a sign of distress, according to the Justice.
"My wife is a private citizen and she possesses the same First Amendment rights as every other American. She makes her own decisions, and I have always respected her right to do so. She has made many sacrifices to accommodate my service on the Supreme Court, including the insult of having to endure numerous, loud, obscene, and personally insulting protests in front of our home that continue to this day and now threaten to escalate," wrote Alito.
"I am confident that a reasonable person who is not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to affect the outcome of Supreme Court cases would conclude that the events recounted above do not meet the applicable standard for recusal. I am therefore required to reject your request," Justice Alito asserted.
Furthermore, Justice Alito said that his wife decided to fly the Revolutionary War era "Appeal to Heaven" flag at his vacation home in New Jersey on her own accord, stating that she has flown many flags over the years including other patriotic American flags, college flags, flags supporting sports teams, state and local flags, etc.
"I was not familiar with the 'Appeal to Heaven' flag when my wife flew it. She may have mentioned that it dates back to the American Revolution, and I assumed she was flying it to express a religious and patriotic message. I was not aware of any connection between this historic flag and the 'Stop the Steal Movement,' and neither was my wife. She did not fly it to associate herself with that or any other group, and the use of an old historic flag by a new group does not necessarily drain that flag of all other meanings," said Alito.
The Supreme Court Justice concluded, "A reasonable person who is not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to affect the outcome of Supreme Court cases would conclude that this event does not meet the applicable standard for recusal. I am therefore duty-bound to reject your recusal request."
Senators Durbin and Whitehouse have not yet responded to Alito's refusal.
This is in response to a letter sent by top Senate Democrats to Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday, requesting a formal meeting to discuss Justice Alito's role in those cases following a media-made controversy regarding an American flag having flown upside down at his home and an Appeal to Heaven flag flown at his beach house. cases flag controversy. They demanded that Alito recuse himself from all Supreme Court cases involving J6 and Trump.
A recent New York Times hit piece on Justice Alito over two flags spotted outside his houses in Virginia and New Jersey, one an upside-down American flag in 2021 and the other an Appeal to Heaven flag in 2023, was what prompted the demand from the senators. Democratic lawmakers claimed that these two flags are "MAGA battle flags" that were used as symbols at "Stop the Steal" protesters.
In the letter sent to Democrat Senators Dick Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse, Justice Alito asserted he will not recuse himself from the requested cases and insisted that he had no involvement in flying the flags, stating that his wife put them up and her decision to do so is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
"As the Court has pointed out, '[i]ndividual Justices, rather than the Court, decide recusal issues.' I am therefore responding directly to your letter. In it, you claim that two incidents involving the flying of flags created an appearance of impropriety that requires my recusal," wrote Alito. "The two incidents you cite do not meet the condition for recusal."
"The first incident cited in your letter concerns the flying of an upside-down American flag outside the house in Virginia where my wife and I reside. In considering whether this event requires recusal, an unbiased and reasonable person would take into account the following facts. I was not even aware of the upside-down American flag until it was called to my attention. As soon as I saw it, I asked my wife to take it down, but for several days, she refused. My wife and I own our Virginia home jointly. She therefore has the legal right to use the property as she sees fit, and there were no additional steps that I could have taken to have the flag taken down more promptly," the Justice explained.
Justice Alito said that his wife's decision to fly the flag was over a "very nasty neighborhood" dispute in which one of their neighbors had displayed a sign attacking her personally, and a man living at the home followed her down the street and berated her while screaming foul language at her. She flew the flag as a sign of distress, according to the Justice.
"My wife is a private citizen and she possesses the same First Amendment rights as every other American. She makes her own decisions, and I have always respected her right to do so. She has made many sacrifices to accommodate my service on the Supreme Court, including the insult of having to endure numerous, loud, obscene, and personally insulting protests in front of our home that continue to this day and now threaten to escalate," wrote Alito.
"I am confident that a reasonable person who is not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to affect the outcome of Supreme Court cases would conclude that the events recounted above do not meet the applicable standard for recusal. I am therefore required to reject your request," Justice Alito asserted.
Furthermore, Justice Alito said that his wife decided to fly the Revolutionary War era "Appeal to Heaven" flag at his vacation home in New Jersey on her own accord, stating that she has flown many flags over the years including other patriotic American flags, college flags, flags supporting sports teams, state and local flags, etc.
"I was not familiar with the 'Appeal to Heaven' flag when my wife flew it. She may have mentioned that it dates back to the American Revolution, and I assumed she was flying it to express a religious and patriotic message. I was not aware of any connection between this historic flag and the 'Stop the Steal Movement,' and neither was my wife. She did not fly it to associate herself with that or any other group, and the use of an old historic flag by a new group does not necessarily drain that flag of all other meanings," said Alito.
The Supreme Court Justice concluded, "A reasonable person who is not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to affect the outcome of Supreme Court cases would conclude that this event does not meet the applicable standard for recusal. I am therefore duty-bound to reject your recusal request."
Senators Durbin and Whitehouse have not yet responded to Alito's refusal.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign in to comment
Powered by The Post Millennial CMS™ Comments
Join and support independent free thinkers!
We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.
Remind me next month
To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy
Comments