Amid the roiling controversy over flags associated with right-wing MAGA violence that were flown outside Samuel Alito's homes, the conservative Supreme Court justice has insisted on staying where he is and refused to step aside from cases involving Donald Trump and the January 6 insurreciton. Despite Alito's excuse that it was his wife who is "fond of flying flags," one of his former law clerks says that his explanation doesn't pass muster.
That law clerk, Susan Sullivan, wrote in a piece for The Philadelphia Inquirer that "the flag flying upside down at his home in the past unequivocally telegraphs reasonable questions about his impartiality in cases involving Trump."
"These questions, separate and apart from the crisis in confidence that such conduct may raise for the court, mandate Justice Alito’s recusal from these cases," she continued. Sullivan said that the decision to come forward was not easy, because she had clerked for Alito and knew to be "honorable" and a "man of integrity," but the issue at hand was of paramount importance. "At stake is not only the independence of the court itself, but also its constitutional credibility, and its role as a protector of our constitutional democracy," she warned in her op-ed.
Sullivan brought her argument to MSNBC, telling host Lawrence O'Donnell that the display of an "incendiary" Appeal to Heaven flag at the Alitos' New Jersey home is an "irrefutable symbol not just of people who still challenge the legitimacy of the election, but who actually violently attacked the Capitol ... irrespective of why it is there, who put it there, it shouldn't have been there."
"This decision to recuse himself is misguided — its bonkers, it's not a legal term, but I think it is," she said. She and O'Donnell pointed to the Supreme Court's Code of Conduct, which states that the appearance of impropriety to a reasonable person is enough to mandate a recusal. Alito has argued that the flags would not meet that standard.
