This post first appeared at Common Dreams on June 26, 2024.
Because, for him, the end—achieving national “godliness”—justifies the means, Alito’s approach to his job is disingenuous and dishonest.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has frequently proclaimed his determination to impose his religious views on the entire country. Alito’s tendency toward Christian nationalism—“the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way”—isn’t new. But in a Supreme Court justice, it’s especially dangerous. And lately Alito has become more outspoken on the subject.
Addressing the Federalist Society in 2020, he said, “In certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.”
In a May 11, 2024 commencement speech at a Catholic college in Ohio, he told graduates, “Freedom of religion is… imperiled. When you venture out into the world, you may well find yourself in a job, or community, or a social setting when you will be pressured to endorse ideas you don’t believe, or to abandon core beliefs. It will be up to you to stand firm.”
At a June 3 meeting of the Supreme Court Historical Society, liberal documentary filmmaker Lauren Windsor approached Alito. “As a Catholic and as someone who, like, really cherishes my faith,” she said, “I just don’t, I don’t know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that, like, needs to happen for the polarization to end. I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”
Alito agreed with Windsor, saying that she was “probably right” that one side or another is going to win. Along with four of the five other justices comprising the court’s conservative block, he is also a Catholic.
“I mean, there can be a way of working—a way of living together peacefully,” Alito added, “but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference.”
Windsor continued, “People in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that—to return our country to a place of godliness.”
Alito replied, “I agree with you.”
It’s not clear what is more remarkable—that a sitting Supreme Court justice holds extreme religious views “that can’t be compromised” or that Alito discusses those draconian views so freely with a stranger at a public gathering.
Religious Absolutism in Practice
Left unsaid was Alito’s more startling point: His definition of “godliness” doesn’t include all religions. The resulting arrogance leads to a simple view of the world as a constant struggle between good and evil. Personal religious beliefs become the sole criterion by which to categorize all conduct. Such myopia creates an unwarranted confidence in one’s own moral certainty where reasonable people disagree.
Alito isn’t just an ordinary citizen advocating his personal preferences. He’s one of nine Supreme Court justices at the top of the country’s judicial system. He casts votes and writes opinions that affect every facet of American life. And because, for him, the end—achieving national “godliness”—justifies the means, Alito’s approach to his job is disingenuous and dishonest.
Facts don’t matter. They yield to a simplistic approach to everything: Abandon secularism and promote “godliness”—as Alito defines it.
For example, wrapping himself in false history under the guise of “originalism” in interpreting the U.S. Constitution, he wrote the 2022 majority opinion that obliterated 50 years of precedent under Roe v. Wade and removed a woman’s right to control her own pregnancy. And he persuaded five other justices to join him, including all three appointees of former President Donald Trump.
As the dissenters in that case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, emphasized, Alito got the supposed historical justification for his aberrant ruling “embarrassingly” wrong. But the consequences were dramatic:
Never before in its history had the U.S. Supreme Court rescinded an individual right in its entirety and conferred it on the states.
Alito didn’t care. Precedent and actual history were irrelevant. He got the religious result he wanted and imposed it on the entire nation.
Passing the Blame
Only 30% of Americans qualify as Christian nationalism adherents or sympathizers. In the cosmic battle between good and evil, they believe that they are God’s boots on the ground. They were at the front lines in the fight to overturn the 2020 election of President Joe Biden. And they helped to mobilize Trump supporters on January 6.
Flags associated with the insurrection and Christian nationalism have flown outside Alito’s two homes. But when called to account, Alito couldn’t take the heat. He blamed his wife for flying outside his Virginia residence an upside-down American flag on January 17, 2021. It’s a universal symbol of dire distress that the pro-Trump mob promoted on January 6 in connection with the bogus “Stop the Steal” movement. Alito said that his wife flew the flag after a confrontation with a neighbor, but the confrontation actually occurred weeks later—in mid-February. Alito’s excuse fell apart.
Likewise, Alito pointed an accusing finger at his wife for flying an “Appeal to Heaven” flag outside the Alitos’ New Jersey beach house in 2023. He claimed not to have known its political or religious significance.
Above the Law
If you’re Samuel Alito, none of the rules applies to you. Unlike the rest of the federal judiciary and every state court, U.S. Supreme Court justices have no mandatory ethical requirements. The court has no process for forcing recusal in cases where a justice has a clear conflict of interest. And it has no recourse for dealing with a justice who accepts thousands of dollars in gifts from individuals or groups seeking influence.
When the media exposed Alito’s free travel on a billionaire’s private jet to a luxury fishing resort in Alaska, he responded that if he hadn’t taken the seat, it would have remained empty. So the fact that the one-way ride would have cost him more than $100,000 was somehow irrelevant, and he didn’t have to disclose it pursuant to federal law.
Huh?
When it comes to flouting ethical standards, Alito’s conservative colleague, Justice Clarence Thomas, is even worse. Over 20 years, Thomas received unreported gifts worth millions of dollars. Alito took second place with $170,000.
In Alito’s conversation with Laura Windsor during which he agreed that America should return to a place of “godliness,” she asked what could be done to restore public trust in the court—which is at record lows. Alito blamed the media: “I wish I knew. I don’t know. It’s easy to blame the media, but I do blame them because they do nothing but criticize us. And so, they have really eroded trust in the court.”
Clarence Thomas has the same attitude. Complaining recently about the “nastiness and lies” he has faced, he called Washington, D.C. a “hideous place” and one reason that he and his wife, Ginni—who was intimately involved in promoting the January 6 insurrection—“like RVing.”
The Thomas’ also probably like traveling in their luxury motorcoach because a millionaire forgave the $267,000 loan that Thomas used to buy it.
When they were kids, I wonder how often Alito and Thomas told their teachers that the dog ate their homework. Or when caught doing something wrong replied with comedian Flip Wilson’s line, “The devil made me do it.”
How do you solve a problem like Alito—or Thomas?
Shine a spotlight on them.
Wait for them to retire or die.
And vote for a President who will not fill their seats with like-minded replacements.
The Belly of the Beast 