Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is not a kind person. If anything, it is clear that he is quite mean. I say this without having met him but in response to what seems obvious: Since writing the majority opinion in the decision that struck down a woman’s constitutional right to abortion, the 72-year-old justice doesn’t seem to have spent any time fretting over the weight of his action.
Instead, he was in Rome last week, speaking at a conference on religious freedom hosted by Notre Dame Law School. Rather than acknowledge the suffering and confusion he has thrust upon the country, the women unable to obtain medication and practitioners fretting about lawsuits when they should focusing on saving lives, he used the global outrage his writing has spawned as a punch line.
“I had the honor this term of writing, I think, the only Supreme Court decision in the history of that institution that has been lambasted by a whole string of foreign leaders — who felt perfectly fine commenting on American law,” Alito said, drawing laughs from the crowd. He joked that British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who announced that he’s stepping down from that position, had “paid the price” for speaking out. He needled Prince Harry for listing the Dobbs decision drafted by Alito as part of a “painful year in a painful decade.”
Alito’s actual lamentations were saved for the decline in religiosity in the United States and Europe. “This has a very important impact on religious liberty because it’s very hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” he said.
But Salon’s Amanda Marcotte notes correctly that “if Republicans want to know who is to blame for young people abandoning the church in droves, they should look in the mirror.” The cultural clashes that Alito referees as a Supreme Court justice have often pitted conservative Christians, particularly evangelicals, against those in favor of expanded rights for everyone regardless of sex, sexuality, gender and race.
“The more both Republicans and the Christian establishment reject these basic rights, the more they can expect to be rejected themselves, especially by younger people,” Marcotte writes. Moreover, the recourse that Alito all too often favors appears to be less a protection of religious freedom than an imposition of one religion as the baseline of morality and public policy.








