Alito steps out of Suncor v. Boulder County climate case a week before argument
Justice Samuel Alito will not take part in the Supreme Court's climate liability case against Suncor and ExxonMobil, set for argument Oct. 5. The court's letter gave no reason, and outlets differ on the likely cause and on what it means for the outcome.
Updated (version 4). New coverage since the last version from Raw Story.
1 / 5
The story, neutrally told
The Supreme Court told lawyers in a letter dated Monday, Sept. 28, that Justice Samuel Alito "will not continue to participate" in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County. BreitbartR “Alito had decided he “will not continue to participate” in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County.” Read at Breitbart ↗ ReasonRC “"Justice Alito has determined that he will not continue to participate in this case."” Read at Reason ↗ The letter gave no reason, and arguments are set for Oct. 5, the first day of the new term. BreitbartR “The letter gave no reason for his decision. Arguments are set for Oct. 5, the first day of the court’s new term.” Read at Breitbart ↗ Fox NewsR “without providing an explanation” Read at Fox News ↗ Boulder County and other Colorado local governments are suing Suncor and ExxonMobil under state law for climate-related damages; the companies argue federal law bars the claims. BreitbartR “The companies are asking the Supreme Court to decide whether federal law prevents the local governments from pursuing those claims.” Read at Breitbart ↗
Left-leaning groups had pressed Alito to recuse over his energy stocks. NBC News reports he owns no stock in Exxon or Suncor but holds shares in ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66 and five other energy firms. NBC NewsLC “Although Alito does not own stocks in either company, he does hold stocks in oil companies ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66, as well as five other firms involved in the energy sector” Read at NBC News ↗ Earlier, a court spokeswoman said Alito had no financial interest in any party and that court counsel advised recusal was not required. NBC NewsLC “Alito was advised by the court’s legal counsel that “his recusal is not required,”” Read at NBC News ↗ Raw StoryL “legal counsel had advised his recusal was not required.” Read at Raw Story ↗ Reason's Jonathan Adler suspects, without confirmation, that the stocks are the cause and questions the timing; Breitbart and Fox stress that no reason has been given, noting his January recusal in a Louisiana oil case came with a stated ConocoPhillips reason. ReasonRC “Justice Alito's recusal is likely a result of his ownership of individual energy company stocks.” Read at Reason ↗ Fox NewsR “because he owned stock in ConocoPhillips” Read at Fox News ↗
Adler calls the recusal likely bad news for the petitioners, while Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network does not expect it to change the outcome. ReasonRC “Justice Alito's recusal is likely bad news to the petitioners” Read at Reason ↗ Fox NewsR “I do not expect his recusal to ultimately change the outcome of Suncor v. Boulder” Read at Fox News ↗ A 4-4 split is now possible; Hot Air says that would leave the Colorado ruling in place and send the case to trial without setting national precedent. The Wall Street Journal editorial board called that outcome regrettable and asked "What changed?" Hot AirR “a tie would be seen as not setting a national precedent” Read at Hot Air ↗ Raw StoryL “"What changed?" the board asked.” Read at Raw Story ↗ Some conservative groups are separately urging Justice Elena Kagan to recuse over a climate chapter in a judges' reference manual. Fox NewsR “Justice Elena Kagan has faced calls to recuse herself from Suncor v. Boulder” Read at Fox News ↗ NBC NewsLC “Kagan wrote a brief foreword to the manual and recently told lawmakers that she never read the chapter in question.” Read at NBC News ↗
Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on.
Left2 outlets
- Framing
- Presents the recusal as a reversal after pressure over stock holdings (NBC) and as a surprise that has unsettled conservative commentators (Raw Story).
- Emphasis
- Alito's earlier resistance, his named holdings, and the possible 4-4 split.
- Leaves out or plays down
- Little on conservative arguments that the case is a policy fight over courts.
- Charged language
- “Rattled WSJ board”“abruptly stepped aside”
Centre1 outlet
- Framing
- The Hill's only item is an opinion piece arguing that oil companies cannot use the Clean Air Act to avoid state-law liability; it is not about the recusal itself.
- Emphasis
- The merits and the Clean Air Act.
- Leaves out or plays down
- The recusal, its cause and consequences.
- Charged language
- “Big Oil can’t hide behind the Clean Air Act”
- For example
-
“It was not designed to shield fossil fuel companies from legal accountability or to eviscerate states’ authority to protect their citizens from conduct that brings harm to communities and costs the taxpayers billions.” — The Hill
Right4 outlets
- Framing
- Focuses on the unexplained nature and timing of the recusal, its effect on the oil companies' chances, and Kagan's separate recusal calls; some frame the pressure as politically motivated.
- Emphasis
- No reason given; possible outcomes; Kagan; tort litigation as a way around elected officials.
- Leaves out or plays down
- Fox and Breitbart give little weight to the stock-holdings explanation that NBC and Reason cite.
- Charged language
- “weaponizing the court system”“the usual suspects”
- For example
-
“The case has drawn scrutiny from Republicans, who argue Colorado officials are weaponizing the court system to get their environmental agenda enacted.” — Fox News
“The groups pushing Justice Alito to recuse himself are the usual suspects.” — Hot Air
“The petitioners appear to lose a vote they might need” — Reason
What every side reports
- Alito will not participate in Suncor v. Boulder County, per a court letter to counsel.
- The letter gave no reason.
- Argument is set for Oct. 5, the term's first day.
- A court spokeswoman earlier said Alito had no financial interest in any party and recusal was not required.
Where accounts differ
-
Why Alito withdrew
- Left
- NBC News says he stepped aside after calls over his oil-company stock holdings; Raw Story stresses his earlier resistance.
- Centre
- The Hill piece (opinion) argues the Clean Air Act does not shield oil companies; it does not address the cause.
- Right
- Reason suspects stocks; Breitbart and Fox say no reason has been given; Fox quotes allies who say it was his personal consideration.
-
Effect on the outcome
- Left
- NBC and Raw Story note a 4-4 split is possible.
- Right
- Reason calls it likely bad news for petitioners; Severino and Skinner (Fox) say it should not be dispositive; Hot Air says 5-3 is a win for oil companies if justices hold their positions.
-
The Supreme Court's letter announcing Alito's withdrawal from Suncor v. Boulder County gave no reason.
Reported- Reports 6
- NBC News, Raw Story, Breitbart, Fox News, Hot Air, Reason
-
Alito's withdrawal is linked to his oil-company stock holdings, which drew recusal calls.
Mixed- Supports 1
- NBC News
- Disputes 2
- Breitbart, Fox News
- Reports 3
- Raw Story, Hot Air, Reason
-
Alito's absence could change the case's outcome, possibly producing a 4-4 split.
Mixed- Supports 1
- Reason
- Disputes 1
- Fox News
- Reports 3
- NBC News, Raw Story, Hot Air
-
Alito has no financial interest in any party to the Suncor case, and recusal was not required.
Reported- Reports 4
- NBC News, Raw Story, Breitbart, Hot Air
Samuel Alito person
Announced through the clerk's letter that he will not continue to participate; no reason given. Earlier, via a spokeswoman, he had said no recusal was required.
““Justice Alito has determined that he will not continue to participate in this case,” the letter said.” — NBC News
Elena Kagan person
Faces calls from some conservatives to recuse over a foreword to a judges' manual; she told lawmakers she never read the climate chapter.
“Kagan wrote a brief foreword to the manual and recently told lawmakers that she never read the chapter in question.” — NBC News
Wall Street Journal organisation
Its editorial board called a possible 4-4 deadlock "regrettable" and asked what changed, saying perhaps there is a good reason.
“"Perhaps there's a good reason," the board wrote.” — Raw Story
Left3 articles
-
In reversal, Justice Samuel Alito steps aside from major climate case
Neutral News report casting the move as a reversal after recusal calls over stock holdings.

-
Rattled WSJ board demands to know 'what changed' after Justice Alito's surprise recusal
Critical Recasts the WSJ board's response as a rattled demand for answers.

-

Centre1 article
-
The HillN · · Opinion
Big Oil can’t hide behind the Clean Air Act
Critical Opinion arguing oil companies cannot use the Clean Air Act to escape accountability.
Right5 articles
-
ReasonRC ·
As Suncor Approaches, Justice Alito Recuses
Mixed Legal analysis calling the recusal bad news for petitioners and questioning its timing.
-
Hot AirR ·
Justice Alito Recuses Himself From Climate Change Case
Mixed Blog post relaying NBC and speculating on outcomes and motives of the groups pressing for recusal.

-
Justice Alito Recuses Himself from Major Climate Lawsuit Against Oil Companies
Neutral Straight report stressing no explanation was given and citing the code of conduct and January recusal.

-
Supreme Court climate showdown jolted by Alito's last-minute decision
Mixed Reports the recusal as jolting the case, gives conservative voices to downplay its impact, and links to Kagan's recusal calls.

Show 1 moreShow fewer
- 28 Sep 19:10 First NBC NewsLC In reversal, Justice Samuel Alito steps aside from major climate case
- 28 Sep 19:46 +36m ReasonRC As Suncor Approaches, Justice Alito Recuses
- 29 Sep 00:00 +4h 50m Hot AirR Justice Alito Recuses Himself From Climate Change Case
- 29 Sep 03:07 +7h 57m BreitbartR Justice Alito Recuses Himself from Major Climate Lawsuit Against Oil Companies
- 29 Sep 15:00 +19h 49m The HillN Big Oil can’t hide behind the Clean Air Act Opinion
- 29 Sep 21:34 +26h 24m Fox NewsR Supreme Court climate showdown jolted by Alito's last-minute decision
- 30 Sep 01:02 +29h 52m Raw StoryL Rattled WSJ board demands to know 'what changed' after Justice Alito's surprise recusal
- 30 Sep 22:33 +51h 23m Raw StoryL Samuel Alito again throws his wife under the bus after recusal firestorm
- 30 Sep 22:51 +51h 41m ReasonRC Justice Alito Says Recusal in Suncor Energy v. Boulder County a "Difficult Judgment Call"
Times are when each article was published, or when we first saw it if the outlet gave no time.