Supreme Court Insurrectionist Wives Club: Unveiling a Dangerous Pattern

 

Left: Justice Alito and Martha Alito Right: Ginni and Justice Thomas
Credit: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP/File ANGERER/GETTY IMAGES

CUBN- Washington, D.C. (Supreme Court) - The events unfolding at the national level, particularly within the Supreme Court, have significant implications locally, especially for those of us living in ruby-red states led by radical extremist conservatives. These leaders seek justification to embolden their actions, replicating gerrymandering, political extremism, scapegoating, and gaslighting seen at the highest court. The judiciary is being weaponized as a catalyst for toxic changes that no rational person in this country would support. It is a travesty that white nationalist and racist individuals in high positions are using their power to perpetuate the worst kinds of behavior, and the entire world is watching.

Source: Wikipedia

In 2006, during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Justice Samuel Alito stated: "I not only complied with the ethical rules that are binding on federal judges and they're very strict, but also that I did what I've tried to do throughout my career as a judge and that is to go beyond the letter of the ethics rules and to avoid any situation where there might be an ethical question raised. I don't just comply with these ethics rules; I go above and beyond."

However, recent events suggest a stark contrast to his 2006 statements. Martha-Ann Alito, Justice Alito's wife, has found herself at the center of a significant ethics scandal involving the Supreme Court. Two weeks ago, the New York Times reported that an upside-down American flag, a symbol of distress and often associated with the January 6th insurrection, was flown at the Alito's home. Justice Alito responded, pointing the finger at his wife, Martha-Ann, stating she flew the flag as part of a dispute with neighbors. Additionally, another flag associated with the insurrection was discovered at the Alitos' vacation home.

Justice Alito defended his actions in letters to Congressional Democrats, asserting that his wife's fondness for flying flags does not meet the standard for recusal. However, many ethics experts and a sitting federal judge have disagreed, arguing that the situation does meet the standard for recusal.

A Closer Look at the Incidents

Martha Ann Alito Source: Lexington Herald

After January 6th, a neighbor of the Alitos put up signs reading "Trump is a fascist, and you are complicit." These signs were taken down shortly after by the neighbor’s mother, fearing unwanted attention. On the day of President Biden’s inauguration, the neighbor drove by the Alitos' home and encountered Martha-Ann Alito, who allegedly spat toward their vehicle. 

The conflict reignited when Martha-Ann Alito allegedly berated the neighbors, calling them fascists. This incident led to the neighbors reporting the Alito's to the police. Justice Alito remained silent during these confrontations, allowing his wife’s behavior to escalate without intervention.

In another incident, the Washington Post reported that Martha-Ann Alito explained the flag flying upside down as an international signal of distress due to a neighborhood dispute. Justice Alito intervened during a reporter's visit, attempting to downplay the incident.

Ethical Concerns and Public Trust

Chief Justice John Roberts Source: Public Domain

Justice Alito’s refusal to recuse himself from January 6th-related cases, despite the involvement of his wife in politically charged actions, raises significant ethical concerns. His defense—that his wife’s actions are independent and do not reflect his own—fails to address the appearance of partiality.

The broader implications of these actions are profound. As Mark Joseph Stern from Slate Magazine points out, this behavior undermines public trust in the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice, John Roberts, has remained silent on these matters until today. Chief Justice John Roberts declined an invitation to meet with Democratic senators to discuss Supreme Court ethics and the controversy over flags that flew outside homes owned by Justice Samuel Alito.

Roberts’ response came in a letter to the senators a day after Alito separately wrote them and House members to reject their demands that he recuse himself from major Supreme Court cases involving former President Donald Trump and the Jan. 6 rioters because of the flags, which are like those carried by rioters at the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., a member of the Judiciary panel, had written to Roberts a week ago to ask for the meeting and that Roberts take steps to ensure that Alito recused himself from any cases before the court concerning the Jan. 6 attack or the Republican former president’s attempts to overturn his 2020 election defeat.

The Case of Ginni Thomas

Virginia "Ginni" Thomas Source: Chip Somodevilla / Getty

The controversy surrounding Martha-Ann Alito is reminiscent of another Supreme Court ethics scandal involving Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas. Ginni Thomas’s involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, including pressuring officials and participating in insurrectionist activities, including text messages discovered by the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th Riots.

The text messages, reviewed by CNN, show Ginni Thomas urging Mark Meadows to persist in efforts to overturn the election results.

"Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!! ... You are the leader, with him, who is standing for America's constitutional governance at the precipice. The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History," Thomas wrote on November 10, 2020.

Thomas frequently checked in with Meadows, encouraging him to push claims of voter fraud and work to prevent the election from being certified. Meadows often responded. On the same day, he wrote: "I will stand firm. We will fight until there is no fight left. Our country is too precious to give up on. Thanks for all you do."

On November 24, 2020, Meadows assured Thomas that he wasn't done battling on Trump's behalf, invoking his faith as a source of strength.

"This is a fight of good versus evil. Evil always looks like the victor until the King of Kings triumphs. Do not grow weary in well doing. The fight continues. I have staked my career on it. Well, at least my time in DC on it."

Thomas wrote to Meadows on November 19, 2020, "Sounds like Sidney and her team are getting inundated with evidence of fraud. Make a plan. Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down." Attorney Sidney Powell, who worked on Trump-aligned lawsuits challenging the 2020 election results, referred to herself as "The Kraken," referencing the ancient mythological sea creature.

By the end of November, Thomas was increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress in overturning the results.

On November 24, 2020, she wrote: "I can't see Americans swallowing the obvious fraud. Just going with one more thing with no “frickin” consequences... the whole coup and now this... we just cave to people wanting Biden to be anointed? Many of us can't continue the GOP charade."

Congressional Response and Future Implications

Congressman Dan Goldman, along with 43 colleagues, authored a letter to Justice Alito calling for his recusal. Alito's response, asserting his impartiality, was met with disbelief. The assertion that Congress has no oversight or leverage over the Supreme Court’s ethical conduct is alarming. 

Justice Alito’s and Justice Thomas’s refusal to recuse themselves from cases involving significant conflicts of interest poses a severe threat to the integrity of the judiciary. As these cases proceed, the actions of the Supreme Court justices will undoubtedly face increased scrutiny.

The involvement of the wives of Supreme Court justices in politically charged and ethically questionable actions highlights a serious concern about the impartiality and integrity of the nation’s highest court. As public confidence wanes, it is crucial for the justices to uphold the ethical standards they once professed to follow, ensuring that the judiciary remains a fair and unbiased arbiter of justice.

section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.