Wire flash
Justice Alito: Recusal in Suncor Energy case was a 'difficult judgment call'
Editorial responsibility
- No named human review is recorded for this page.
- Source reporting is collected, normalized, translated or condensed automatically when needed.
- Automatically published source-backed update
Bloomberg reports that Justice Samuel Alito described his last-minute decision to recuse from Suncor Energy v. Boulder County, the first case of the Supreme Court's term, as a 'difficult judgment call.' The case is a major climate change preemption dispute. Alito initially participated when the court agreed to hear the case in February but decided to step aside after deeper review before oral arguments. A coalition of watchdog and environmental groups had called for his disqualification. Alito stated that recusal was 'the prudent step' given the arguments from both sides. He noted that federal law requires recusal only if a judge owns stock in a party to the case, not in companies that could be affected, and that his legal office advised he was not required to recuse. Alito explained that his wife inherited the energy shares and wishes to hold onto individual stock, including in oil and gas companies.
Source report
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg reports on an interview with Justice Samuel Alito, who detailed his last-minute decision to recuse himself from Suncor Energy v. Boulder County — a major climate change preemption case the Supreme Court will hear on Monday. According to the story, Justice Alito described the decision as a "difficult judgment call."
Key Details from the Interview
- Although Alito participated when the Court agreed to hear the case in February, he said Wednesday that he decided to step back after examining the case more closely in the lead-up to oral arguments.
- A coalition of watchdog and environmental groups had called on Alito to disqualify himself.
"Taking into account the particular arguments that were made on both sides here, I thought that recusal was the prudent step," Alito said.
Legal Framework on Recusal
Federal law requires judges to step aside if they own stock in one of the parties to a legal dispute, but does not impose a similar restriction for shares in companies that could be affected indirectly.
"Under that rule, I was not required to be recused, and I asked our legal office, as is my custom on any case where there's an arguable recusal issue, to give me their opinion on whether I was required to recuse, and they said, 'No,'" Alito said.
Reason for Holding Energy Stocks
The report also sheds light on why Justice Alito continues to hold individual energy stocks despite the recusal risk.
Alito said his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, inherited the energy shares. "She wants to hold on to individual stock, and so we have stock holdings in some companies in the oil and gas field," he said.
Source
Reason MagazineWestern
Part of this Story
Justice Alito Recuses from Major Climate Case Suncor Energy v. Boulder County