supreme court

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. has served on the Supreme Court for over 20 years. He’s not done yet.

“Obviously I’m here for another term,” Alito, 76, said in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, officially putting rumors over his retirement to rest.

Speculation over the justice’s possible retirement reached a fevered pitch leading up to the end of the Court’s 2025-2026 term at the end of June.

Given Alito’s conservative record, some thought he might step down ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, as Republicans control both the presidency and Congress. Supreme Court justices are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

Asked by The WSJ editor James Taranto about the speculation, Alito replied, “It’s not pleasant, in the sense that it’s a reminder of mortality. It’s like, what are those vultures doing up there? They are flying around. But it goes with life tenure.”

Some assume Alito and any potential replacement would be interchangeable.

“Yeah, I think some of those who call for the retirement of judges think that way,” he acknowledged. “I don’t watch cable news at all anymore, but I assume this is still true. … I’m sure that’s how they see the court.”

But history shows ostensibly conservative justices don’t always meet expectations.

“No more Souters!” became a conservative rallying cry after former President George H.W. Bush picked David Souter to serve on the Court in 1990. Despite assurances he would be conservative, Souter quickly turned out be a “disaster.”

Former President George W. Bush nominated Alito to the Supreme Court on October 31, 2005, to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Bush’s nomination of Alito followed the president’s failed nomination of Harriet Miers, whom conservatives fiercely opposed.

“Judge Alito is one of the most accomplished and respected judges in America,” President Bush said in announcing Alito as his pick. “His long career in public service has given him an extraordinary breadth of experience.”

Before his nomination to the Supreme Court, Alito served in the Army Reserves, worked as a federal prosecutor, served as assistant to the solicitor general, and then served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.

“Federal judges have the duty to interpret the Constitution and the laws faithfully and fairly, to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans, and to do these things with care and with restraint,” Alito said upon his nomination, “always keeping in mind the limited role that the courts play in our constitutional system.”

“I pledge that if confirmed I will do everything within my power to fulfill that responsibility.”

The Senate confirmed Alito on January 31, 2006, in a 58-42 vote.

Since then, Justice Alito has lived up to that promise. He has authored or joined some of the Court’s most consequential decisions, including the 2022 Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

In her recently published book, Alito: The Justice Who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution, The Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway reveals why Justice Clarence Thomas chose Alito to author the Dobbs decision. According to the Court’s usual practice, the senior justice in the majority gets to assign the opinion.

“[Thomas] knew Alito was this guy who was going to be strong enough to get [the Dobbs decision] over the finish line and keep everybody together,” Hemingway explained. “He wanted someone who was just going to be perfect to write this.”

Alito is one of the Court’s most ardent proponents of originalism, the judicial philosophy that stresses judges should seek to interpret the law according to its original meaning.

Alito has his own book, So Ordered: An Originalist’s View of the Constitution, the Court and Our Country, due out in October. He told The WSJ his book will examine six “wrong turns” originalists can take. Justice Alito has called himself a “practical originalist.”

The Supreme Court’s next term begins in October 2026. The Court has taken up several significant cases, including whether states can require residents provide proof of citizenship to register to vote (Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota); whether governments can ban the possession of popular AR-15 assault rifles (Viramontes v. Cook County); and whether states can deny funding to faith-based preschools (St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy).

It’s not clear how the Court will rule in these cases. But come what may, Justice Alito plans to be there, considering arguments, questioning both sides and upholding the Constitution.

“I vote in every case the way I think the case should be decided,” Justice Alito said. “I explain why I’ve done it. People can agree, people can disagree.”

Related articles and resources:

Trump Victory Likely Cements Conservative Supreme Court for Decades to Come

Justice Alito Says Nation Must Return to a ‘Place of Godliness.’ He’s Exactly Right.

Justice Samuel Alito Warns of Declining Support for Free Speech and Freedom of Religion

Justice Alito Blames ‘Dobbs’ Leaker for Inciting Assassination Attempt on Justice Kavanaugh

Photo from Getty Images.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Elena Kagan’s joint appearance on Capitol Hill on Tuesday was the first time a sitting member of the High Court had testified before Congress since 2019.

Answering questions before House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees, the justices were there to defend and justify the Supreme Court’s request for more budgetary dollars, specifically an increase in security spending.

In the aftermath of the Dobbs decision, conservative members of the court have been subjected to a dramatic increase in physical threats to the justices and their families.

After the Dobbs decision was leaked, a would-be assassin from California made his way to Justice Kavanaugh’s home with an array of weapons, including a gun, multiple rounds of ammunition, a knife, and zip ties. Mentally unstable, he called police after arriving and confessed his plot. 

In the last few years, protesters have also descended on the homes of Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett. In June, Justice Barrett was the victim of a “swatting attack” – a tactic used to send armed police to a residence and hopefully incite a violent incident against the victim. 

To show you just how far we’ve fallen, not too long ago, Justice Thomas used to walk to morning Mass from the Supreme Court. The late Justice Rehnquist often enjoyed lunchtime strolls on the Mall. No justice will ever again enjoy such freedom.

In appealing for an increase to security funding, Justice Barrett was making that very point and shared how the very real threats have taken a toll on her family.  Given the escalating dangers in recent years, security officials briefed the justices and also practically equipped them – even with Kevlar.

Justice Barrett told lawmakers, “I didn’t expect that performing this service (as a justice) would put me in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was.” She also added, “They have required my children to think about and see things that children should not have to see or think about.”

The testimony was a vivid example of the spiraling cultural dysfunction that many have been warning and lamenting about for decades. It was also a vivid reminder that public service doesn’t just impact the public official but also their family.

Frustrated with a few of Justice Barrett’s recent decisions, some critics, who might otherwise be fans of the former University of Notre Dame law professor, lashed out at her testimony. The essence of the criticism was that Barrett needs to toughen up. Some even went so far as to suggest she should resign if she couldn’t handle the personal threats.

Keep in mind her testimony, while personal, was thoughtful, measured, and professional. Such a cold and heartless reaction from people who should know better is disappointing, of course. It should be noted that Justice Barrett undoubtedly knew voting to overturn Roe would elicit an overwhelmingly negative outcry – but she still joined the majority in striking down the bad law.

Any claim that Justice Barrett’s decisions are somehow compromised because of personal threats belies reality. It’s also nonsensical why any critic would want to see a justice cave to intimidation and only encourage more of it from either side.

It’s one thing for critics to question a justice’s legal reasoning. That’s healthy and expected. But it’s an entirely different issue to verbally attack a justice who was simply relaying the very real fallout of a decaying culture where radicals threaten to kill a judge because they believe the justice ruled the wrong way.

As Christians, we should pray for Justice Barrett and her entire family. We should also pray for the eight other justices and their loved ones, too. It was the Apostle Paul who urged believers to pray “for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Tim. 2:2).