Alito’s Recusal From a Key Climate Case May Be Too Little, Too Late
This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Justice Samuel Alito decided Monday to sit out one of the most consequential climate change cases to reach the Supreme Court, but legal experts expected continuing ramifications due to his ownership of individual corporate stocks, including in the fossil fuel […]
Justice Samuel Alito's decision to recuse himself from one of the most consequential climate change cases to reach the Supreme Court is insufficient, as his ownership of corporate stocks, including in the fossil fuel industry, may raise ethical concerns. After months of resistance, Alito reversed his position one week before the Supreme Court was to hear the oil industry's bid to block Boulder, Colorado's lawsuit seeking damages related to climate change.
Although the Clerk of the Court informed the lawyers that Alito would no longer participate, Alito continues to hold stock in companies facing lawsuits that hinge on the Supreme Court's decision. State court judges have stayed 11 such cases pending the outcome of Suncor v. Boulder, including cases Alito has previously recused himself from.
A ruling favoring the oil companies could lead to blanket immunity from liability for climate change impacts. Environmental groups have called for an investigation into whether Alito violated laws or ethical codes. The situation highlights the ethics controversies at the Supreme Court, with Chief Justice John Roberts previously defending the system in which justices decide for themselves when to recuse themselves.
Written by urgent.news from Mother Jones's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
