Media’s Latest Hit Job Against Alito Is A Total Joke
The article defends Justice Samuel Alito against recent media attacks, notably from The Guardian, which accused him of financial conflicts related to fossil fuel investments. It clarifies that Alito has no current financial interests in energy companies involved in a Supreme Court case concerning climate litigation, and he has recused himself from related cases when conflicts existed. The piece argues that the real issue for critics is Alito’s judicial approach,which interprets laws as written rather than bending them to political agendas. It suggests that left-wing outlets and figures are more interested in exerting influence over the court and its rulings than in genuine ethical concerns, portraying thier criticisms as a smear campaign motivated by a desire to undermine the judiciary’s independence and conservative rulings on energy policies. The article emphasizes that the left’s protests mask their broader goal of controlling the court’s influence rather than a concern for ethics or openness.
Corporate media have a unique ability to produce some of the most deceitful and pathetic “journalism” imaginable. And their latest hatchet job against Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is no exception.
Brought to readers by the foreign-based Guardian, the hit piece centers around an analysis by a hyper-partisan left-wing judicial group of Alito’s purported financial gains from his fossil fuel-related investments over the past 20 years. As evidenced by the article’s disingenuous framing, the point of this “reporting” is to try and paint a cloud of impropriety over the justice’s participation in an upcoming SCOTUS case involving several oil companies.
In Suncor Energy, Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, the high court will consider a lawsuit brought by Boulder, Colorado, officials against the Exxon Mobil Corporation and three Suncor Energy businesses. The left-wing challengers are seeking damages from the companies based on allegations that their fossil fuel-related activities are contributing to “climate change,” which the officials argue harms their residents and property.
Quoting from the left-wing group’s (Court Accountability) Democrat co-founder Lisa Graves, author Dharna Noor tries to advance the narrative that Alito can’t be trusted to be impartial in the Suncor case due to his investments in the energy sector. But there’s just one teeny, tiny problem that even The Guardian was forced to admit: There is no evidence to suggest that Alito currently has financial interests in the companies involved in the case.
Following leftist calls to recuse himself from the dispute earlier this year, a Supreme Court spokeswoman told NBC News that Alito “does not have a financial interest in any party” in the matter, and that the court’s legal counsel told him that “his recusal is not required.” While the Bush appointee reportedly owned ExxonMobil stock back in 2004, the same NBC News report confirmed that the Bush appointee “does not [currently] own stock in either ExxonMobil or Suncor Energy, according to his most recent financial disclosure report, which was filed last year” — a point Court Accountability’s analysis also conceded.
Even as she subsequently tried to insinuate wrongdoing by Alito for “voting in favor of fossil fuel interests” in recent SCOTUS decisions, Noor ultimately acknowledged that the justice has done due diligence in recusing himself from cases in which he has a financial conflict. This includes his recusal from an earlier version of the Colorado case in 2023 because, according to the court’s spokeswoman, “it was considered at the same time as other cases where the justice did have a financial interest in the parties.”
Some may find it baffling that The Guardian and Graves are up in arms over Alito’s fossil fuel investments while remaining simultaneously unbothered by the conflicts of interest involving Democrat-appointed justices or the growing controversy surrounding Elena Kagan in the same Suncor case. But in the end, it’s not that hard to understand.
These left-wing crisis actors aren’t really outraged about Alito’s finances any more than they were about Clarence Thomas’ or any of the other conservative justices. What’s actually driving their anger is that Alito is ruling on cases involving energy policy (and a host of other issues) in ways they don’t like.
Time and again, Alito and his conservative colleagues have rebuked the left’s climate lawfare in cases before the bench. Rather than advance what they want the law to be, they’re interpreting what the law says, and ruling accordingly.
For the left, that isn’t how the judiciary is supposed to work. Under their worldview, the Supreme Court is nothing more than another lever of power to be weaponized to ram their agenda down Americans’ throats — the law’s original meaning be damned.
It’s because Alito and many of his conservative colleagues reject this approach that they are assaulted with the type of disgraceful media hit pieces above. The left can’t control the court, so they’re doing everything in their power to destroy it.
Contrary to their claims otherwise, the media and other Democrats aren’t concerned about Supreme Court “ethics” or “transparency.” It is, as it’s always been, about power.
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He is a co-recipient of the 2025 Dao Prize for Excellence in Investigative Journalism. His work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics and RealClearHealth. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
