Opinion

What were Justice Alito, his wife — and The Post — thinking?

Regardless of how he decides any Jan. 6 cases, his judgment will be greeted with doubt. After all, how can one separate oneself from the convictions one has expressed in public, or that one’s family members appear to have expressed? Justice Alito’s rejection of basic concern for the court’s reputation will forever be a stain on both the institution and his own legacy. I am hopeful that a future Congress will establish some oversight of justices who refuse to recuse in obvious conflict-of-interest situations.

John Hilton, Lemoyne, Pa.

The flying of these particular flags on Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.’s properties, together with his response to the many inquiries about his judgment, unfortunately demonstrate that he possesses a personal characteristic that all too often induces public officials to abuse the authority they’ve been given, to the detriment of the public they are to serve.

The characteristic is arrogance. And Justice Alito’s arrogance has been consistently on display over the past few weeks in his claim that he and his wife have the right to express their opinions outside of the court whenever and wherever they wish; in his rejection of the obligation incumbent on all public officials to avoid activities that the public might reasonably perceive as presenting a conflict between the official’s personal interests and the interests of the public whom the official is sworn to protect; and in his all-too-apparent lack of concern for the reputational impact these flags have upon the institution of which he is a member.

Justice Alito’s basic response to the inquiries he has received regarding these flag-flying incidents has, in essence, been “nothing more to discuss.” I, and many other Americans, disagree.

Philip Sunderland, Alexandria

The path forward

Jennifer Rubin’s May 26 online column, “What more need Alito do before Durbin gets off the stick?,” was dead right about how destructive the court led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. is, and why Justice Alito should recuse himself from Jan. 6 cases. But her criticism of Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) missed the mark.

I share Mr. Durbin’s doubts that a hearing will address the heart of the issue: the Supreme Court’s embrace of a right-wing activist agenda.

Justice Alito’s conduct is, in my view, shocking. His “blame my wife” defense of the controversial flags outside his homes, and his Alaska fishing trip with Leonard Leo, both flout the requirement that all judges must maintain the appearance of impartiality.

Since Justice Roberts’s 2005 appointment and Justice Alito’s confirmation in 2006, and with the help of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and former president Donald Trump, the Supreme Court has taken aim at our democracy. The disastrous Citizens United decision flooded our campaigns with dark money. In a shameful reversal, Dobbs stripped citizens of a constitutional right.

Yet all Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee adamantly opposed the ethics bill introduced by Mr. Durbin and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), claiming it would be “judicial interference.” It’s very doubtful they will cooperate to address the flags displayed outside Justice Alito’s homes.

The good news: What Mr. Durbin has been able to accomplish, despite a one-vote majority, is to confirm more than 200 well-qualified federal judges with balanced views and a shared dedication to the Constitution. As Ms. Rubin suggests, the direction of the Supreme Court must be an issue for voters. Judiciary Committee Democrats will continue to do our part to try to hold the court accountable. We hope the same is true of our Republican colleagues.

As we work, one person has the responsibility and authority to act immediately to effect the change we need: the regrettably timid chief justice. He could enforce a stronger code of conduct today.

Peter Welch, Burlington, Vt.

The writer, a Democrat, represents Vermont in the U.S. Senate, is a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Different strokes

While attending a local community meeting the other night, I was struck by the fact that our county surrogate, whose job is to handle probate cases, adoptions and the like, displays more concern for public perception of her fairness and impartiality than does Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Permitting a flag claimed by the “Stop the Steal” fringe movement to fly over his home and a banner that has become associated with that cause and that of increasing religious influence on government shows a complete disdain for the ethical standards to which all U.S. judges beneath the level of the Supreme Court must hold themselves. His actions show contempt not simply for his neighbors but for the traditions of the American judicial system — and thus for the American people’s expectation that the system itself treat them fairly.

Steven Lestition, Lawrenceville, N.J.

In the early 1990s, I was on a Pentagon assignment that required me to make public appearances around the country, speaking to veterans’ groups and various civic organizations. Frequently, these groups presented me with a small memento such as an embroidered baseball cap, a logo T-shirt or a pen-and-pencil set.

When I returned to the Pentagon, I was required to turn in these gifts to the Defense Department’s Office of the General Counsel and fill out a form describing who gave me the gift and what I did for them. A few weeks later, I would receive a package through Pentagon interoffice mail with a letter from the general counsel telling me that, in their judgment, no laws had been violated by my accepting the gift, and I could keep it.

Now, we find that Supreme Court justices accept with impunity all-expenses-paid fishing trips, sweetheart loans to buy luxury recreational vehicles and multi-thousand-dollar honoraria for making speeches.

Why was I — an unimportant Army colonel — required to abide by ethical laws far more stringent than any such rules covering Supreme Court justices?

Joseph A. Schlatter, Heathsville, Va.

What’s love got to do with it?

I’m pretty sure that if I asked my spouse to “please take that flag down because it might cause difficulties for me, and it might call into question the impartiality of the Supreme Court and thereby harm one of our country’s most important institutions,” my spouse would take it down.

Sue J. Henry, McLean

I generally agree with Ruth Marcus’s opinions, but I found myself nodding even more than usual upon reading her May 30 op-ed, “For the Alitos, logic flies upside down.”

Upon graduation from law school some decades ago, I served as a law clerk to a federal judge who was married. The judge’s wife was a quite independent and intelligent woman. Indeed, years after my clerkship, I discovered that they voted in different parties. That fact notwithstanding, never in a million years would the judge’s wife have done anything similar to what Martha-Ann Alito did. Why? For precisely the reasons Ms. Marcus cites: “[Justice Samuel A.] Alito recognized instantly that the upside-down flag presented a problem.” Methinks Justice Alito doth protest too much.

Marc Chafetz, Washington

Do those critical of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.’s flags have wives? If so, do they get to tell them what they can and cannot do?

Tom Hafer, Arlington

I find it curious that Republicans are defending Supreme Court Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas by saying they shouldn’t be held responsible for the actions of their spouses.

At the same time Republicans are attacking President Biden as being responsible for the actions of his son Hunter. Have they no sense of irony?

Larry McClemons, Annandale

God: “Have you eaten from the tree whose fruit I commanded you not to eat?”

Adam: “It was the woman …”

Congratulations to Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., whose dedication to originalism has led him to employ the oldest defense known to mankind.

Philip Billings, Concord, N.H.

Civics lessons

Of all the newspapers in the country, The Washington Post, the District of Columbia’s newspaper, should have written a serious article about Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.’s unpatriotic disrespect of the flag. In doing so, The Post could have explained to readers the history, meaning and significance of the flag, and thus how dishonorable was the Alitos’ act. As a child living on various military bases where my father was stationed, I watched as the flag was taken down at sundown every day and carefully — even religiously — folded. If we were driving, we were to stop the car so that my father could stand at salute. And when driving without him, we still stopped and were silent.

Of course, those not in the military are not always schooled in the importance and meaning of the flag or how it must be honored at all times. That’s why most Americans need a tutorial to understand just how deeply unpatriotic Justice Alito’s act was. (America certainly punished Colin Kaepernick for a far less disrespectful act — and he had no obligation to the rest of us, as does Justice Alito.) Most schools no longer teach civics and government, and when they do, it’s as an elective. I am very disappointed that the nation’s newspaper missed this opportunity to teach all Americans to show their loyalty to American ideals by honoring the flag.

Nancy Luque, Washington