The New York Times launched a smear campaign earlier this month over Justice Samuel Alito’s disputes with neighbors and the American flag that flies at his home. This attempted character attack has spawned several others, all of which appear designed to undermine the Supreme Court’s credibility and embarrass Justice Alito to step aside from cases in which Democrats and their allies on the left are politically and emotionally invested.
Democrats made heavy use of the false flag story, calling on Justice Alito not only to recuse himself from cases related to former President Donald Trump and the January 6 protests, but also to apologize for his alleged “disrespect for the American flag and sympathy with violent right-wing insurrectionists.”
All their puffery, exaggerations, and baseless assertions were in vain, just as their similar efforts were in vain.
last year In a letter Wednesday, Justice Alito very politely disagreed with Democratic Sens. Richard Durbin of Illinois and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
“A reasonable person not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to influence the Supreme Court’s decisions would conclude that this event does not meet the test for recusal.”
I have written Justice Alito had previously cited the disqualification clause in the court’s code of conduct, adding, “I am therefore bound to deny your request to recuse myself.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (R-Md.), driven by political considerations and clearly eager to influence future Supreme Court decisions, wrote an op-ed on Wednesday in the liberal newspaper where the latest smear campaign against Alito began.
Editorial The article is titled “How to Force Justices Alito and Thomas to Recuse in the January 6th Case.”
Raskin suggested the Biden Justice Department could pressure the Supreme Court to act in Democrats’ favor.
Reusing the New York Times insinuation, Raskin characterized his and other advocates’ demands as a “groundswell of appeals,” before writing: “The Department of Justice, including the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, the appointed U.S. Special Counsel, and the Attorney General, all of whom are differently involved in the criminal prosecutions underlying these cases and who disagree with Mr. Trump’s constitutional and statutory arguments, can petition the other seven justices to ask Justices Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves, not on pardon, but on law.”
Raskin suggested the Biden Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland could invoke the U.S. Constitution’s due process clause and “a federal law that allows for the disqualification of judges in cases of questions of impartiality, 28 U.S. Code Section 455,” to require potentially biased judges to recuse themselves at the start of the proceedings.
According to Raskin,
April’s Silence Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson prejudice In connection with the Idaho incident sex“If arguments are properly presented to the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Sonia Sotomayor will be obligated to carry out both their constitutional and statutory duties.“Avoidance Criteria”
Moreover, the Democrat suggested that the concerns previously fabricated in the Times amounted to reasonable doubts about Justice Alito’s impartiality, something that would normally merit a judicial challenge in lower courts.
He then ended his editorial by likening the Supreme Court justices to umpires, noting that “an umpire should not be allowed to call balls and strikes in a World Series game after his wife tried to overturn and reverse the official score of the previous game in the World Series in favor of the losing team,” in what appears to be a new assailant against at least one justice’s wife.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get stories like this directly to your inbox. Register here!
