Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito rejected Democrat calls for his recusal from a case after giving interviews with a lawyer involved in the suit.
By giving such interviews to an attorney involved in a case pending before the Supreme Court, Justice Alito “violated a key tenet of the Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices to which all Supreme Court Justices purport to subscribe,” the letter argued.
“Recusal is a personal decision for each Justice, and when there is no sound reason for a Justice to recuse, the Justice has a duty to sit. Because this case is scheduled to be heard soon, and because of the attention my planned participation in this case has already received, I respond to these concerns now,” he wrote.
When Mr. Rivkin participated in the interviews, he did “as a journalist, not an advocate,” Justice Alito said. He pointed out that many justices have, over the years, taken part in interviews with representatives of media outlets that have “frequently been parties in cases before the Court.”
“Many of my colleagues have been interviewed by attorneys who have also practiced in this Court, and some have co-authored books with such attorneys. Those interviews did not result in or require recusal.”
Justice Alito wrote that Senator Durbin’s request for recusal is based on a theory that his vote in the Moore v. United States case would be affected “in some way” due to interviews with Mr. Rivkin.
“That theory fundamentally misunderstands the circumstances under which Supreme Court Justices must work.”
Supreme Court Justices often have to preside over cases in which one of the attorneys have spoken favorably or unfavorably about their work. The justices also receive briefs from Members of Congress who have supported or opposed their Supreme Court confirmations or have made positive or negative comments about them, he said.
If the justices were to recuse themselves from such cases, the Supreme Court would “regularly have less than a full bench.”
“In all the instances mentioned above, we are required to put favorable or unfavorable comments and any personal connections with an attorney out of our minds and judge the cases based solely on the law and the facts,” Justice Alito wrote.
“And that is what we do. For these reasons, there is no sound reason for my recusal in this case, and in accordance with the duty to sit, I decline to recuse.”
Congress Versus Supreme Court
Justice Alito’s interviews with Mr. Rivkin had irked several Democrats. In a July 28 interview, Justice Alito pointed out that “Congress did not create the Supreme Court”—the Constitution did. “I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it … No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.”“I don’t know that any of my colleagues have spoken about it publicly, so I don’t think I should say. But I think it is something we have all thought about.”
Justice Alito’s refusal to recuse himself from the Moore v. United States case has attracted criticism and support.
Carrie Severino, president of nonprofit organization Judicial Crisis Network (JCN), defended Justice Alito’s stance on the recusal issue.
