 |
| Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is recusing himself from a case involving fossil fuel companies, reversing his earlier plans thanks to public pressure. |
"Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito announced Monday that he will recuse himself from a major climate change-related case the court is set to hear next week, following weeks of pressure from environmental groups that argued he was compromised by his financial holdings in the oil and gas industry."
Alito sent a letter to the court clerk saying he would not participate in the case, but did not explain the reasoning behind his decision.
The case involves Boulder, Colorado and whether it can sue Suncor Energy and ExonMobil for damages caused by climate change. Or whether state laws are pre-empted by federal law and separation of powers principles in the Constitution.
The Supreme Court case will have a big impact on similar legislation on other states, including Vermont.
Even with Alito apparently out of the picture, it's unclear whether the rest of the Supreme Court will side with Boulder. The Supreme Court hasn't really been friendly to environmental initiatives in recent years.
Alito owns stock in ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66, among other energy holdings, CNN reports.
In any event, Alito's turnaround is a bit of surprise. Back in May, a Supreme Court spokesman had said that since Alito doesn't have stock in the oil companies involved in the court case, he needn't recuse himself.
Alito's recusal came after a lot of public pressure. As Scotusblog reports:
"In May, a coalition of left-leaning watchdog groups urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate Alito's involvement in the dispute, contending that his 'substantial holdings in individual oil and gas companies' among other issues, would 'undermine(e) public confidence in the impartiality of the Court.
They stated that Alito had 'previously recused from considering a petition brought by' the same companies involved in Suncor Energies, 'There is no apparent reason for this change in Justice Alito's recusal practices, and Alison provided no statement justifying his failure to recuse,' the groups wrote."
There's a lot to complain about regarding our current U.S. Supreme Court, but this was at least a small victory in the name of fairness.
Under the Supreme Court’s code of conduct, which the justices issued in November 2023, justices are required to recuse themselves from “a proceeding in which the Justice’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The code defines this as a situation in which “an unbiased and reasonable person who is aware of all relevant circumstances would doubt that the Justice could fairly discharge his or her duties.” The code of conduct notes that this includes cases in which a justice “has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding.”
