The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Rhymes with Punt
Following up on the fringe theory about Justice Alito's flag, Shannon Bream of Fox News has these tweets:
I spoke directly with Justice #Alito about the flag story in the NYT. In addition to what's in the story, he told me a neighbor on their street had a "F--- Trump" sign that was within 50 feet of where children await the school bus in Jan 21. Mrs. Alito brought this up with the neighbor. 1/
According to Justice Alito, things escalated and the neighbor put up a sign personally addressing Mrs. Alito and blaming her for the Jan 6th attacks. 2/
Justice Alito says he and his wife were walking in the neighborhood and there were words between Mrs. Alito and a male at the home with the sign. Alito says the man engaged in vulgar language, "including the c-word". 3/
Following that exchange, Mrs. Alito was distraught and hung the flag upside down "for a short time". Justice Alito says some neighbors on his street are "very political" and acknowledges it was a very heated time in January 2021. 4/4
Unlike our star spangled banner, this story did not even give proof through one night.
Fun fact: Chief Justice Taney and Francis Scott Key were dear friends. Indeed, Taney married Key's sister. Though this is probably more fodder for people who want to cancel the Star Spangled Banner.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What’s that Dutch (German?) word for when you feel embarrassment on someone else’s behalf? That’s what I’m feeling for OP rn.
Barbara Walters: What made you hang the flag upside down?
Mrs. Alito, shedding just the right number of tears: For the children, Barbara. For the children.
Fremdshämen.
What part of Justice Alito's account do you feel undermines the prior reporting?
It's "flood the zone with shit[posting]." Josh is just trying to get up as many hits as possible, to muck up the SEO.
Well, there's the part about children walking past the sign on their way to the school bus. Of course, in January 2021, the schools were closed due to covid, so it appears Alito is making stuff up again.
There's a term some of us are familiar with: judicious. It appears Alito is unfamiliar with that term, or at least he makes no attempt to behave in a judicious manner. Bottom line here is that this undermines the notion of Alito's impartiality to the point where he should not be deciding cases involving Jan 6th.
Fuck you, Josh. Nothing here contradicts the NYTimes story.
Alito lies. We know it, and he has no reason to tell the truth (much less clarify what a "short time" is supposed to be or explain the logic in any particular detail) to Fox News. The details over the exchange are just provided to incense the snowflakes who watch Fox News, and have no bearing whatsoever on the question:
What did (a spouse of) a Supreme Court justice think it meant to fly the American flag in a "distress" position, days after Trump's second impeachment and before Biden's inauguration, in the aftermath of the J6 insurrection?
Think you'll change anyone's mind with that post, Simon?
Think Josh is changing anyone's mind, with his? Or you?
I can assure you he scores not a single point (except, inconsequentially, with the people of his ilk).
"What did (a spouse of) a Supreme Court justice think"
Its a question only idiots are asking.
Simon sounds like he could be one of Alito's neighbors.
Because the answer is obvious?
"Nothing here contradicts the NYTimes story. Alito lies."
How is he lying, if he is confirming the story?
He's lying to the NYTimes, he's lying to Fox News.
What insurrection ?
Hurr durr
Also, if that really is Alito's house, I'm starting to understand some of Justice Thomas's positions a little better.
Why do all these Justices keep marrying insurrectionists?
These justices need to be true patriarchs and control their wives.
Libs: Women are independent and can speak their mind as they wish
Also Libs: Not that way.
Cons: stop listening to what this woman says!
What is she saying?
And why should we care what a private citizens did 4 years ago?
What is your limitations period on un-American activity, you bigoted right-wing rube?
See, you're still not listening. Is there a statute of limitations on what private citizens say? Especially in relation to contemporaneous events?
HaHa!
The idea the she used the symbol for distress that means imminent danger for something that “distressed” her this way is like giving a kid Prozac because they were depressed the restaurant didn’t serve dino nuggies. Sorry not buying that
::Alito tabs over to The Volokh Conspiracy::
::Sees a post by Backman with Alito in the title::
::Without even reading it, he knows::
::"Josh, please stop helping!"::
From OP : "Justice Alito says some neighbors on his street are "very political"
Pot meet kettle!
Rhymes with "Punt": one remembers the political action committee Roger Stone (pardoned by Trump) formed in 2016 to oppose Hillary Clinton. IIRC it was called "Citizens United for National Triumph" and had a logo which illustrated the initials.
I don't remember it, and Google returns zero results for it, so...
It was Citizens United Not Timid.
Doubting Roger Stone was involved in something sleazy is always a poor choice.
That’s it, thanks. Thanks for the link to the court filing.
A difficult thing to google search for.
The logo IIRC was kind of shaped like a “V” . . .
Its not listed at the federal Elections Commission. Not on Stone's wikipedia page
Check his recent tattoos...
If I understand correctly, the story is that this male neighbor called Mrs Alito the c-word and some other names _in front of Judge Alito_, yet somehow didn't end up swallowing his teeth. I find that odd.
Sometime 70 year old lawyers are able to hear people say mean things without assaulting them.
Hope this helps!
A 70 year old lawyer would also be aware of the legal concept of "fighting words." There are many circumstances where I can listen to all sorts of mean things being said, even about me and mine, without throwing hands. The scenario where the person saying the insult is saying it directly to my wife, in my presence, is not one of them. At best the guy would get a warning, but that depends greatly on his tone and carriage.
Um... I don't think the "fighting words" doctrine means what you think it means.
If you're more troubled by the person who uses colorful language than by the person who is a disaffected, immature twit flying an upside-down flag to demonstrate solidarity with un-American assholes, you're doing it wrong.
"scenario where the person saying the insult is saying it directly to my wife, in my presence, is not one of them"
Oooooh. Internet tough guy!
right? Is he impressed with himself? Because no one else is.
And I have seen few things quite as pathetic as 70+ men in an attempted fist fight.
I like your thinking, but you probably don't take it far enough to its logical conclusion: Alito should have shot the neighbor in self defense.
If Alito would have totally been justified punching the neighbor, but being a 70 year old he would have been in reasonable fear of sustaining serious bodily injury as a result, so just straight out shooting him would seem justified using your reasoning.
Ah yes, the ol' Rittenhouse doctrine:
1. Piss off everyone around you
2. Be subjectively frightened
3. Kill
The fighting words doctrine is 1. All but dead and 2. A justification for the government criminalizing speech. It’s not a justification for a private person committing a violent crime in response to that speech.
Other than that, great comment!
All but dead, yeah, but it literally is a justification for a private person responding violently to speech. It's an affirmative defense, not an interpretive doctrine.
No, it really isn't. Try it though, you might like prison.
You are mistaken. The theory behind the fighting words doctrine is that some speech is dangerous because it’s likely to provoke people to react violently. But the doctrine is that the government can ban the speech, not that people have a license to react violently. There are zero American jurisdictions that recognize fighting words as an affirmative defense.
This story just gets weirder and weirder.
Anyone have any idea where and when the "theory" that a fringed US flag denotes a military or admiralty court, originated?
At some point prior to 1920, the army started using a gold fringe on its flags. There was some discussion about whether or not this was permissible, since the Flag Code doesn’t say anything about a fringe: the adjutant-general of the army and the attorney general both agreed that it was fine. See 34 Op.Att’y Gen. 483 (1925). I believe the conceit is that because 1. the Flag Code doesn’t say that the flag has a fringe; and 2. the military regulations say to use a fringe, it follows that 3. any flag with a fringe on it is a military flag. Identifying flaw in this reasoning is left as an exercise for the reader.
That does seem to be the reasoning, if you can really stretch the word to cover something so silly.
I never knew that, Nas, about the fringes on US flags in the Army. I learn interesting things here.
Based on this information, one can reasonably infer that Mrs. Alito was insulted and blamed for January 6 in a sign put up by her neighbor, and in response Mrs. Alito intentionally displayed a symbol related to the January 6 and/or stop the steal "movement." Whether she meant it as a sincere sign of support for the stop the steal "movement," or if she just put it up to antagonize/provoke/get under the skin of someone she was in a spat with, can be debated. Justice Alito's culpability in this scenario is also debatable. But it was at least intended to bring the stop the steal movement to mind, and the symbol was raised on a Supreme Court Justice's property at the very least. I do find it newsworthy that the symbol of a dissident political movement whose devotees attacked the capital was flown on a Justice's property.
What is the chance that Mrs. Alito, rather than Justice Alito, ran that flag up the flagpole?
"What is the chance that Mrs. Alito, rather than Justice Alito, ran that flag up the flagpole?"
Based on the evidence presented so far, I would find by clear and convincing evidence that it was Mrs. Alito and not Justice Alito. Only one witness (Justice Alito) has made a statement identifying the perpetrator, he has personal knowledge, his statement has not been controverted by anyone else in a position to know the facts, and he provided a plausible motive for his wife to direct a provocative display towards the neighbors.
How do you know he has personal knowledge? Did he tell you he saw her raise the flag? Did sweet infant Jesus whisper it in your ear?
Justice Alito at least has personal knowledge over whether he himself did it or not.
So . . . he can eliminate one candidate (if he is being truthful). Another eight billion or so and he'll be homing right in on Mrs. Alito's culpability!
"So . . . he can eliminate one candidate (if he is being truthful). Another eight billion or so and he’ll be homing right in on Mrs. Alito’s culpability."
These are examples of why I said "clear and convincing" rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt." Sure, there is a possibility that Justice Alito is lying, and he really did raise the flag, but is blaming his wife because he knows displaying a "stop the steal" symbol would contribute to the perception that he is politically biased. And sure, perhaps the flag was raised by someone other than a member of the married couple that owns the house. But neither of those possibilities ring true to me. I think Mrs. Alito got into a spat after her neighbor blamed the Alitos for Jan. 6, so Mrs. Alito responded by displaying a Jan. 6-adjacent symbol to antagonize the neighbor.
Feels that way to me as well. Fits the facts. = I think Mrs. Alito got into a spat after her neighbor blamed the Alitos for Jan. 6, so Mrs. Alito responded by displaying a Jan. 6-adjacent symbol to antagonize the neighbor.
You speak of Alito as if he is a human to be considered, rather than a useless, sub-human, amoral piece of MAGA scum.
You may want to consider your audience here, and not waste your time.
(But, yes, you are correct.)
I haven't read the NYT article, but Alito didn't mention any "flagpole" in the quoted remarks. Certainly, in the part of the country I used to live in, few people had anything up which a flag could be "run": they had flags more or less permanently attached to a stick, which they usually stuck into a holder on their porch every July 4.
Flying such a flag upside down would actually require a bit of an effort. I wonder how much of an effort "Mrs." Alito put into it?
The picture of Alito's house does show a flag pole. It's still highly questionable his wife did it. That's the only statement we have, but it is highly self-serving. But, yes, if that's all we have and we had to rule, there's currently no evidence Alito himself did it.
Classy, though, throwing his wife under the bus like that.
I have since found "the photo", and I see that this was a proper flag pole with a cleat and everything--little effort would have been required to simply invert the flag and run it up.
But whodunit?
Good point--Alito does not actually deny that the upside down flag was intended to symbolize the “Stop the Steal” movement. By then “Stop the Steal” was a misnomer: the Trump campaign had conspicuously failed to demonstrate that the election had been stolen in any of its multiple court cases. At that point “Stop the Steal” was short for “tear up the Constitution because our preferred candidate lost an election.”
"...dissident political movement whose devotees attacked the capital..."
????
Tinfoil hat time: Alito/Gorsuch leaked this story to the Times to distract from the fact that people read their CFPB dissent and correctly thought it was some of the dumbest shit imaginable. I'd also be embarrassed if this happened to me:
https://x.com/joshchafetz/status/1791109462847094991
My tinfoil theory is that people are catching wind of deliberations on the Trump immunity case, and it doesn't look good - maybe an Alito opinion that will inevitably force the J6 trial until after the election? Maybe an Alito dissent arguing that Trump has absolute immunity for any action he decided was "official"?
Both are strong theories. I prefer the first, as Alito's dissent was so dumb it is hard to imaginer dumber.
But given his household is running upside down American flags up their flagpole, I'm doubting anyone in his house is self-aware enough to realize their idiocy. Which makes me think the latter is more likely, among the tinfoil theories.
.
Who would expect right-wing law professors who operate a blog that habitually publishes racial slurs to understand why some might object to racist lyrics? To people like the Volokh Conspirators, those racist lyrics are part of the song's charm.
Carry on, clingers.
Racist lyrics?
Racist lyrics.
Written by a slaveholding, racist lawyer.
paywalled
It is easy to find information concerning the racist lyrics and the racist, slaveholding author. Even if you don't want to find that information.
I’ve always understood the reference to slaves as metaphorical, with an implied contrast to the American soldiers: the enemy host is mad up of “hirelings” (mercenaries who took the King’s shilling from venality versus patriotic volunteers willing to die for the American cause) and “slaves” (servile subjects of a tyrannical king versus free citizens of a republic), which seems like it makes sense in context and is consistent with early 19th century rhetorical tropes. I guess the reading in the article is available, but it seems like a stretch. I’d certainly want to see some contemporaneous evidence that that was either the intent or received understanding before adopting it.
Unhinged Lefties have been attacking conservative and normal politicians violently lately.
They are escalating. Any politician who isn't a globalist, new world order type is putting their life at risk.
Leftists are on the rise.
Can you tell me how school kids can wait for a school bus when Alexandria shut down schools for the whole month?
They were waiting for a long time?
Maybe it was a bus for a private school? Most of those were open by then since they didn't have a ridiculous teachers' union to deal with.
Leftists are on the rise.
Bwahahaha.
Meanwhile turns out you can just kill BLM protesters in Texas now. They love it.
Example number infinity of right-wingers making both leftists and normie liberals/Democrats sound way cooler and more effective than they actually are in real life.
In unrelated news, Paul Pelosi's attacker was sentenced
The MAGAs don’t want to talk about that.
Having all their clever conspiracy theories and lies about DePape shown to be false during the trial was just too much to bear.
Schools in Alexandria were closed due to COVID lol. So there could not have been kids waiting for the bus.
How did Blackman fall for such a lie?
It is fascinating to watch the birther-QAnon-stolen election clingers swallow Alito's story without so much as a burp.
What a bunch of lame-ass losers. No wonder they're uncompetitive in the culture war . . . and/or mired on the faculty of one of the worst law schools in America.
I checked this: At a Feb. 4, 2021 board meeting, the Alexandria school system approved a plan for reopening with the first batch of students returning on March 2. That doesn’t mean Alito was lying--faulty memory is more likely--but it does make him an unreliable narrator.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/alexandria-arlington-schools-reopening-covid/2021/02/04/1bf19096-6754-11eb-886d-5264d4ceb46d_story.html
https://alextimes.com/2020/08/private-schools-reopening/
I thought private schools had limos...
Nothing changes regarding the substance of the story except for an additional detail regarding the “offensiveness” of the neighbor originally referenced.
I reaffirm my original comment that the Volokh Conspiracy-worthy aspect (except for the true believer caucus) of the NYT article is the discussion of how “employees” (which I assume does not mean the justices; the Court PIO refused to respond to the paper’s request for clarification) have their free speech rights restricted.
The customary Federalist Society apologists for ethically haphazard Republican judges -- Gillers, Hellman, etc. -- are already publicly standing by their man.
That suggests there may be more of this flag to unfurl.
The Trump campaign plays the "Let's Go Brandon" song, which is just a bowdlerized way of saying "Fuck Joe Biden", and "cunt" is no more offensive than "fuck", so I'm not really sure why anyone would be pearl-clutching about decorum. This is where we're at.
And none of it matters because there is no expectation that one's neighbors be polite and there is every expectation -- as you yourself believed when you were calling for RBG to resign because she called Trump an idiot -- that Supreme Court Justices and their families shut the fuck up about their politics in public.
That's seemingly true in the UK. But here in the U.S., the c-word is much more offensive. If you use "fuck" at your job in the abstract ("What the fuck is going on here?") you might get admonished; if you direct it at someone ("Fuck you") you certainly will. But if you call a woman the c-word, any employer with a functioning HR department will show you the door before the soundwaves have stopped echoing off the walls.
You nailed it on what US HR does. Totally.
That's simply because the ford "fuck" is so darned versatile. The other one's range is much more limited, I'm afraid.
What the cunt is going on here ?
Standard everyday phrase !
George Carlin is however, highly amused.
What kind of asshole flies an American flag upside down on a suburban street?
Conservative Republican assholes.
Disaffected Federalist Society assholes.
Un-American clinger assholes.
Superstitious, worthless assholes.
Right-wing culture war casualty assholes.
The person(s) who abused that flag in solidarity with insurrectionists is such an asshole. But no problem that replacement will not solve.
Carry on, clingers. So far as your betters permit.
Wow.
If JB carried any more water, he'd be an aqueduct.
This is precisely the sort of person who understands that he can be (more) successful in an authoritarian regime where debasing oneself in service of your superiors gets you nice things. And he likes nothing if not debasing himself for a superior.
Hard to imagine Josh going too far in Trump world when it’s led by a guy who seems obsessed with appearance and people who look like they’re straight out of “central casting.” (A comment he was made many times). Get thee to a super cuts, Josh! And buy some blue suits with red ties.
Leaders of Authoritarian movements frequently conduct purges of loyalists. I fear for Josh in the brave new future we are hurtling towards.
The Josh Blackmans in the kleptocratic authoritarian states of the world do not make their bread in the halls of power. They're not the judges, they're not the official advisers, they're not in government. Rather, they act much as Josh has long acted - as hyperactive, gloating, disgusting propagandists outside power centers. Always aligning themselves with those in power, easily flattered by the slightest bits of official attention, cheaply bought. They toil on Twitter in order to support the chief thug - think Russian war bloggers or commentators on friendly media in Hungary, or Tucker Carlson.
They never have to be purged - as long as they go along with the chief thug - because their ambitions are not a threat to those in power. Josh will always scurry to the little niche he needs to survive. The people who should be concerned are people like Elon Musk. He thinks he can use his platform to usher in kleptocracy in the U.S., which will inure to the benefit of his companies. But he hasn't the foresight to imagine what will happen when Trump starts calling in favors.
It’s all either brain damaged lunatic true believers (think Rudy, Mike Flynn, etc.) or cynical opportunists who think they can ride the leopard to power without getting their faces eaten. I’ve long put people like Josh, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark in category 2 mentally, but now I’m not so sure.
I think people who would cancel the Star Spangled Banner just would like to see POTUS Hitler arrested and prosecuted for the war crimes and domestic terrorism being committed.
To say nothing about all the Adolph Eichmans about to get a better paying gig than the current corrupt DoJ socialist profit sharing scheme currently being paid by on behalf Racial Jungle Joe and Super Predator Clinton.
Voter ID, drug war, and illegal humans… 1932 Germans got no idea what’s coming.
And there we go, one week later the NYT breaks a continuation of the story that makes clear that the denialists were full of sh*t. Josh, you think you would know better than to weigh in immediately. The media did the same with the Thomas leaks. If you'd ever practiced, you'd know that this is literally the oldest litigation tactic in the book. Reveal half of what you have, get your opponent on the record with a lie or half truth, then bury them with the second half.