Desperate to kneecap Justice Alito, liberal media try tying him to Bud Light boycott

The liberal media has once again launched a concerted campaign to besmirch the name of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and cast doubt on his impartiality in the forthcoming Jan. 6 cases. So far, this campaign — which has given fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas a respite from the media's usual attacks — has been as brazenly partisan as it has been toothless.

Having failed last week to land a decisive blow against the 74-year-old justice, critics scrutinized Alito's investment decisions Monday, seizing upon one in particular. While leftists believe they have found something "suspicious," it appears they have instead discovered a sound investment decision that might resonate with everyday Americans.

An American flag the left can care about

Last week, Obama hagiographer Jodi Kantor of the New York Times concern-mongered about a "'Stop the Steal' Symbol" allegedly displayed at Justice Alito's house after the 2020 election. By "'Stop the Steal' Symbol," Kantor apparently meant an American flag suspended upside down, which historically has signified distress in instances of threats to life or property.

According to the report, the offending symbol was briefly flown by Alito's wife, Martha-Ann Alito, "in response to a neighbor's use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs."

'The flag was a clear violation of ethics rules ... and could sow doubt about Justice Alito's impartiality in cases related to the election and Capitol riot.'

Alito told the host of "Fox News Sunday," Shannon Bream, that a neighbor had a "F*** Trump" sign within 50 feet of where children await the school bus. When the justice's wife expressed concern about the sign, the neighbor allegedly "engaged in vulgar language, 'including the c-word.'"

Citing so-called "experts," Kantor suggested that "the flag was a clear violation of ethics rules ... and could sow doubt about Justice Alito's impartiality in cases related to the election and Capitol riot."

Despite Alito telling the Times he had nothing to do with the flying of the flag and relaying his wife's rationale, Kantor leaned on a nameless neighbor's politicized interpretation and the insights of antagonistic "experts" to suggest that the justice's involvement in Jan. 6 cases may impact confidence in the court.

Democrats immediately seized upon the story, effectively confirming its ultimate purpose.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said, "Justice Alito should recuse himself immediately from cases related to the 2020 election and the January 6th insurrection, including the question of the former President's immunity in U.S. v. Donald Trump, which the Supreme Court is currently considering."

Apparently following the same template, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement, "Samuel Alito should apologize immediately for disrespecting the American flag and sympathizing with right-wing violent insurrectionists. He must recuse himself from cases involving the 2020 election and former President Donald Trump."

The Times followed up its flag piece on Friday, this time with former Marshall Project activist Abbie VanSickle aiding Kantor in the hit.

Extra to building on the suggestion that Alito should recuse himself, the Times slammed Justice Thomas for not recusing himself from the Jan. 6 cases.

Just divestment

While Slate and other leftist blogs worked diligently over the weekend to transform the interpretation by one of Justice Alito's neighbors into a bench-clearing scandal, they did not appear to be any closer to prompting Alito to budge.

On Monday, Law Dork did its part to keep the campaign alive, publishing a blog post entitled, "Justice Alito sold Bud Light stock amidst anti-trans boycott effort."

CNBC and other mainstream outfits similarly carried the story, recycling the insight that Justice Alito allegedly ditched shares of Anheuser-Busch InBev after months of Americans boycotting Bud Light over its collaboration with a transvestic activist. The Daily Beast, like the New Republic, flagged the sale as "suspicious."

Citing a periodic transaction report in the Federal Judicial Financial Disclosure Reports database, Law Dork indicated Alito "sold at least some of his stock in Anheuser-Busch and bought stock in Molson Coors on Monday, August 14, 2023."

Justice Alito allegedly sold between $1,000 and $15,000 of AB InBev stock shortly after the company announced a 10% quarterly drop in sales in the U.S. and a sell-off of beer brands and after a sustained boycott of Bud Light over its celebration of Dylan Mulvaney's "365 Days of Girlhood."

The greater surprise might be that Alito held on as long as he did. After all, in previous months, Bud Light had ceased to be America's best-selling beer and even fell out of the top 10 ranking; analysts at global asset management firm Bernstein warned that Anheuser-Busch InBev should expect a "permanent 15% haircut"; and companies linked to Anheuser-Busch began to close down.

Despite the innocuity of this revelation, CNBC framed it thusly: "The transactions have bred fresh accusations that Alito, one of the high court's six conservatives, is engaging in or aligning with partisan politics, despite a recently adopted code of conduct that directs the justices to 'refrain from political activity.'"

Again, activists framed as experts were summoned to support the campaign.

Gabe Roth, executive director of leftist activist outfit Fix the Court, told CNBC, "This sale, given the timing and much like an upside-down flag, can be construed as a political statement."

"If the sale was in response to the Bud Light controversy last year, he might have an appearance-of-bias problem when it comes to future court cases related to trans rights," added Roth.

Democrats and their allies in the media have long attempted to neutralize Alito in the high court.

Weeks ahead of Alito dumping Anheuser-Busch InBev stock, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee sent Chief Justice John Roberts a letter demanding that Alito recuse himself from Moore v. United States, a tax case on the Supreme Court's docket for the upcoming term.

Alito responded, "Recusal is a personal decision for each Justice, and when there is no sound reason for a Justice to recuse, the Justice has a duty to sit."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!