Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments at decent salaries. They don’t need to own and sell individual stocks.
A new report about Justice Samuel Alito is a reminder of the unnecessary issues that doing so can cause.
To be clear, I’m not referring to The New York Times report about an inverted flag outside Alito’s home after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, which raised questions about his ability to serve impartially in pivotal pending appeals.
Instead, this later report addresses Alito’s apparent sale of Bud Light-maker Anheuser-Busch stock — and his possibly related purchase of Molson Coors stock — in the wake of an anti-trans Bud Light boycott last year. Chris Geidner, who wrote the stock-related report for Law Dork exploring Alito’s possible boycott participation, observed:
Participating in a boycott is undeniably a political statement. And there are pending cases for which participation in an anti-trans beer boycott could be seen as his having a finger on the scale of justice on the side of the anti-trans advocates supporting — and in some cases, defending — these laws such that recusal could be required.
Alito didn’t respond to Geidner for his report, which quoted watchdog Fix the Court’s Gabe Roth as saying that it’s “possible the sale was innocuous, or not related to the controversy, but given Alito’s priors, he’s lost the benefit of the doubt in my view.”








