Ethics code requires step-aside for ‘subject matter or controversy,’ Nagy says
Consumer Watchdog said Justice Samuel Alito’s Monday recusal from a major Supreme Court climate case was the right decision, but one he should have made from the outset.
“Justice Alito’s recusal from Suncor v Boulder is the right decision, and one he should have made from the start,” Nagy said in a statement.
Nagy pointed to the court’s recently adopted code of ethics, which says a justice should step aside if they or their families have a “subject matter or controversy.” Consumer Watchdog argued that Alito’s broader oil holdings meant he could indirectly benefit from a decision in the industry’s favor.
A letter posted in the case announced that Alito “has determined that he will not continue to participate in this case.” The letter did not specify a reason for the recusal, though Alito has previously recused himself from other cases involving companies where he holds stock.
Alito had resisted earlier calls to step aside. Financial disclosures show he does not own stock in the named defendants, Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil, but does hold shares in other oil companies including ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66.
The case was filed by local officials in Boulder, Colorado, and is one of dozens of similar suits alleging the energy companies deceived the public about how fossil fuels contribute to climate change. Billions of dollars in damages could be at stake. The Supreme Court agreed in February to hear an appeal from the companies, which is backed by the Trump administration. The recusal comes shortly before the court hears the case.
The energy companies argue the lawsuits pose a serious threat to the industry and that state courts are not the right place to deal with the global issue of climate change.