Alito’s Suncor recusal leaves Oct. 5 climate case short
Justice Samuel Alito will not take part in Monday’s Suncor/Boulder climate argument, the Supreme Court clerk told parties without explaining why. An eight-justice bench raises tie risk. Critics had questioned his oil-and-gas holdings; the Court earlier said recusal was not required.
The politics of Supreme Court ethics collide with Monday’s calendar. Clerk Scott Harris informed counsel that Justice Samuel Alito “will not continue to participate” in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, SCOTUSblog and Colorado Public Radio reported. Oral argument is Oct. 5. Unlike Alito’s January recusal letter in a different oil-and-gas case that cited a specific ConocoPhillips interest, this note gives no reason.
Watchdog groups had urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate Alito’s participation, citing oil-and-gas holdings and a prior recusal pattern. A Court spokeswoman told NBC News earlier that Alito had no financial interest in any party and that legal counsel advised recusal was not required. Boulder’s suit seeks state-law damages from Suncor and ExxonMobil for climate harms; companies say federal law preempts such claims. The Trump administration backs the companies. Cornell LII lists the case as No. 25-170.
A 4–4 tie would leave Colorado’s decision allowing the suit to proceed undisturbed — a quiet but consequential political outcome for climate litigation nationwide. Justices are not required to explain recusals. Watch Monday’s argument audio, any further clerk letters, and whether ethics critics renew Judiciary pressure.
The Court’s 2023 code of conduct tells justices to step aside when an unbiased person aware of all circumstances would doubt impartiality, including certain financial interests. Justices sometimes explain recusals tied to prior judicial work; they rarely detail stock-sale or prudence decisions. That silence now feeds dueling political narratives heading into the term’s first Monday.
What we know:
Alito is out; argument is Oct. 5; no official reason; a tie would leave Colorado’s go-ahead in place.
What we don’t:
Alito’s private rationale, and how the remaining eight justices will divide on preemption.
Where outlets agree SCOTUSblog and CPR agree Alito will not participate in the Oct. 5 Suncor/Boulder argument.
Where they differ Ethics critics emphasize conflict concerns; the Court’s prior statement said recusal was not required, and the new letter offers no public explanation.