Support truly
independent journalism
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito lost his opportunity to write two majority opinions this term after being unable to convince justices to join his side, a new report detailing contentious relationships inside the court claims.
Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson reportedly flipped on Alito in Moody v. NetChoice LLC, a case about content moderation on social media, after reading his draft opinion. A similar incident reportedly occurred weeks later when Alito won the majority in a case about an alleged retaliatory arrest in Texas and then lost it because he went too far in his opinion.
When that decision was announced at the Supreme Court bench, Alito was missing.
The report by CNN seemingly affirms what many have speculated to be a combative term for the justices as they decided major cases about presidential immunity, emergency abortion rights and administrative power.
Justices’ frustrations with one another seemed tangible in various dissenting and concurring opinions in different cases.
Combined with the negative public attention the court received for Alito’s wife flying an upside-down flag outside of their home – a symbol associated with January 6 rioters – tensions seem to be at an all-time high.
According to the report, Barrett and Jackson initially signaled they would join Alito, Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch to create the majority opinion in the NetChoice case.
Typically, once justices discuss and then vote on a case decision, the most senior justice on either side of the argument will assign another to write the majority and dissent.
But after Alito sent around his draft opinion, in which he questioned if any content moderation on social media platforms is protected under the First Amendment, Barrett and Jackson changed their minds.
In a rare move, the justices chose to join Justice Elena Kagan’s opinion, forcing Alito to write the dissenting opinion.
Ultimately, out of the nine justices, Alito wrote the fewest majority opinions this term.
CNN’s report is part of a larger series aimed at cracking the typically secretive behind-the-scenes of the Supreme Court.
On Tuesday, the media organization reported that Roberts abandoned his typical desire to preserve the reputation of the court and allowed the justices to remain fiercely divided on the Trump immunity case rather than seek negotiations.
Then on Monday, CNN revealed Justices Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh and Barrett privately admitted they mistakenly allowed Idaho to keep its ban on emergency abortions, ultimately deciding they would not take up the case for now.
The Independent has reached out to the Supreme Court public information officer for comment.
The Supreme Court and its justices have been shrouded in a fog of secrecy for most of its existence but in recent years, those close to the court, acquaintances of justices and journalists have sought to air out some of its unknown nature.
In May 2022, a draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade, was leaked, shocking the nation.
Roberts called for a formal investigation but the perpetrator was never uncovered.
Last year, ProPublica investigations found that Thomas had accepted lavish gifts from a Republican megadonor for years and did not disclose them. Thomas defended himself, maintaining that he did not have to disclose personal gifts.
Other investigations into justices’ finances have uncovered a shocking number of potential conflicts of interest, such as Justice Sonia Sotomayor using her staff to help her book sales.
Lawmakers and members of the public have called on the court to be more transparent given its vital role in shaping U.S. policy. But so far, the court has not taken any significant action.
