Alito sits out Suncor climate case argued Monday
The Supreme Court hears Suncor Energy v. Boulder County on Monday, Oct. 5—the term’s opening day—without Justice Samuel Alito. The clerk told parties Sept. 28 that Alito “will not continue to participate.” The case asks whether federal law blocks state climate-damage suits against energy companies.
Justice Samuel Alito will not take part when the Supreme Court hears Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County on Monday, Oct. 5, the first argument day of the October 2026 term, SCOTUSblog confirms. Clerk Scott Harris sent counsel a Sept. 28 letter stating Alito “has determined that he will not continue to participate,” without detailing a reason. No new Court recusal note appeared overnight Saturday or Sunday.
The petition asks whether federal law precludes state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions, and whether the Court has statutory and Article III jurisdiction. Boulder-area officials sued energy companies under state tort theories; similar suits are pending elsewhere, so the ruling could reshape climate litigation nationwide. The Court granted review Feb. 23 and set argument for Oct. 5; the solicitor general won leave to argue as amicus.
Watchdogs had urged the Senate Judiciary Committee in May to probe Alito’s oil-and-gas holdings and prior recusal patterns in related petitions; a Court spokeswoman then told NBC that Alito lacked a financial interest in any party and that counsel advised recusal was not required. Alito later described the decision as a “difficult judgment call,” Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy noted. Oral-argument audio traditionally posts the same day on the Court’s site.
For Colorado communities and energy firms, the stake is who pays for climate harms alleged in state court. Eight justices will hear the case unless further recusals arise—none were announced overnight.
What we know:
Oct. 5 argument is set; Alito is not participating per the Sept. 28 clerk letter; issues are preemption and jurisdiction in Boulder’s climate suit.
What we don’t:
Alito’s formal stated reason beyond later public remarks, how an eight-justice bench may split, or whether other justices will note further conflicts.
Where outlets agree SCOTUSblog’s case page and Alito-recusal report agree the Suncor/Boulder climate case argues Oct. 5 without Alito after the clerk’s Sept. 28 letter.
Where they differ Critics tie the recusal to financial-holding concerns while the Court earlier said Alito had no party financial interest and was advised recusal was not required before he stepped aside.