Recent leaks from the Supreme Court unveil growing dissent among the conservative justices, particularly aimed at Justice Samuel Alito.
According to the Daily Beast, Samuel Alito has reportedly lost majorities twice this year due to growing frustration with him among other conservatives in the courtroom.
Earlier this year, conservative Supreme Court justices twice abandoned Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinions. These unusual actions point to mounting discontent within the courtroom regarding Alito's stance.
One critical case of the division involved laws from Texas and Florida restricting social media platforms' content moderation. These pieces of legislation arose after Facebook and Twitter removed former President Donald Trump's accounts following the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. A trade group named NetChoice challenged these laws, declaring them unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
Although district courts in Texas and Florida suspended the laws temporarily, they did not reach a consensus. The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Texas and concluded that content moderation fell outside protected speech. Meanwhile, the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals supported Florida’s stance, maintaining that content moderation does involve First Amendment rights.
The Supreme Court took up the debate on February 26. Justice Alito backed the 5th Circuit's perspective, challenging the expressive nature of content moderation in his draft opinion. However, as differences emerged, Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson sided with Justice Elena Kagan’s analysis, leaving Alito with only Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch in support.
The second significant case revolved around Sylvia Gonzalez, a councilwoman in Castle Hills, Texas. Gonzalez alleged that her arrest resulted from retaliation for criticizing the city manager. The 5th Circuit had previously dismissed her claim, noting probable cause.
However, in March, the Supreme Court acknowledged errors in the 5th Circuit's narrow interpretation. The case saw another split as Alito’s draft opinion exceeded the consensus sought by other justices. This led to the majority disbanding, and a new unsigned decision criticized the 5th Circuit's strict view on retaliation claims under the First Amendment.
Justice Alito’s detailed concurring opinion highlighted perceived flaws in Gonzalez’s arguments, bringing forth a more limited approach that did not align with the majority's interpretation.
These episodes reflect broader frustrations among conservative justices with 74-year-old Justice Alito. Reports from CNN suggest a growing sentiment of irritation with Alito’s extreme positions on pivotal cases.
The social media case demonstrated a stark contrast, with a divided bench pondering the limits and protections of content moderation. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Brett Kavanaugh reportedly leaned towards a more inclusive interpretation, aligning generally with Kagan's viewpoint.
In contrast, the retaliation claim from Gonzalez revealed deeper fissures. The Court, in its majority unsigned opinion, criticized the Fifth Circuit’s "overly cramped view," standing as a testament to the prudence exercised by the other justices.
Recent leaks reveal significant conservative dissent within the Supreme Court regarding Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinions in major cases. These instances of divergence are rare and signal mounting dissatisfaction with Alito's extreme stances. Cases involving social media content moderation and First Amendment retaliation claims illustrated the Court's internal struggles, ultimately underscoring the need for balanced and prudent judicial decisions in interpreting constitutional protections.
