[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1244 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>






118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1244

Censuring Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., for knowingly violating 
       the Federal recusal statute and binding ethics standards.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2024

 Mr. Cohen (for himself, Mrs. Ramirez, Ms. Balint, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. 
   Tlaib, Ms. Norton, Mr. Mullin, Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania, and Mr. 
 Espaillat) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
Censuring Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., for knowingly violating 
       the Federal recusal statute and binding ethics standards.

Whereas the Constitution establishes three coequal branches of government--
        legislative, executive, and judicial--each with its own powers and 
        responsibilities;
Whereas every person who appears before a United States court should have 
        confidence that his or her case will be heard fairly and judged solely 
        on the facts before the court and a thorough and thoughtful application 
        of law;
Whereas the words ``Equal Justice Under Law'' are carved above the entrance of 
        the Supreme Court, declaring the core value of the Federal judiciary;
Whereas judicial impartiality is foundational to our system of justice and 
        essential to uphold the Constitution's guarantee of due process and 
        equal protection of the laws;
Whereas judicial independence and impartiality is essential to the fair 
        administration of justice and the legitimacy of the courts;
Whereas Congress has established binding ethics requirements and standards for 
        the Federal judiciary;
Whereas the Federal recusal statute, section 455 of title 28, United States 
        Code, requires a justice ``[to]...disqualify himself in any proceeding 
        in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned'' or ``where he 
        has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party'';
Whereas, on November 13, 2023, the Supreme Court, with all nine Justices acting 
        unanimously, promulgated a Code of Conduct for the Justices of the 
        Supreme Court of the United States;
Whereas the preface to the Code includes the statement: ``For the most part 
        these rules and principles are not new: The Court has long had the 
        equivalent of common law ethics rules, that is, a body of rules derived 
        from a variety of sources, including statutory provisions, the code that 
        applies to other members of the Federal judiciary, ethics advisory 
        opinions issued by the Judicial Conference Committee on Codes of 
        Conduct, and historic practice'';
Whereas the Code preface also suggests that the code was promulgated to 
        ``dispel'' ``the misunderstanding that the Justices of this Court, 
        unlike all other jurists in this country, regard themselves as 
        unrestricted by any ethics rules this misunderstanding'';
Whereas Canon 2(A) of the Code provides that a ``Justice should respect and 
        comply with the law and act at all times in a manner that promotes 
        public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary'';
Whereas Canon 3(B) of the Code incorporates the Federal recusal statute, 
        providing that ``a Justice should disqualify himself or herself in a 
        proceeding in which the Justice's impartiality might reasonably be 
        questioned, that is, where an unbiased and reasonable person who is 
        aware of all relevant circumstances would doubt that the Justice could 
        fairly discharge his or her duties'';
Whereas Canon 5 of the Code provides that a Justice should not ``publicly 
        endorse or oppose a candidate for public office'' or ``engage in other 
        political activity'';
Whereas, on May 16, 2024, the New York Times published a photograph taken on 
        January 17, 2021, of an American flag being flown upside-down in front 
        of the residence of Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Jr.;
Whereas the upside-down flag is a widely understood symbol of the so-called 
        ``Stop the Steal'' effort which falsely and without evidence espoused 
        that the 2020 Presidential election was stolen and that former President 
        Donald J. Trump, not President Joe Biden, was actually elected as 
        President of the United States;
Whereas, on January 6, 2021, just a few days before the upside-down American 
        flag flew in front of Justice Alito's home, rioters who similarly 
        carried the American flag upside-down stormed the United States Capitol 
        in a violent effort to prevent Congress from certifying the results of 
        the 2020 election;
Whereas the United States Flag Code, codified in section 8 of title 4 of the 
        United States Code, provides, ``No disrespect should be shown to the 
        flag of the United States of America;...(a) The flag should never be 
        displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in 
        instances of extreme danger to life or property'';
Whereas by flying the flag upside-down in front of his residence during the 
        period between the certification of the election and the inauguration in 
        2021, at a time when former President Trump and his political allies 
        were actively disputing the validity of the election results, there was 
        a reasonable perception that Justice Alito was supporting former 
        President Trump's efforts to overturn the election results or signaling 
        that President Biden's election posed ``extreme danger to life or 
        property'';
Whereas, despite acting in a matter that creates a public perception of bias, 
        Justice Alito continued to hear and participate in cases directly 
        related to the 2020 election and the January 6, 2021, insurrection; and
Whereas Justice Alito's actions violate the principles of judicial independence, 
        impartial administration of justice, and the rule of law: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) censures Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., for 
        knowingly violating the Federal recusal statute and binding 
        ethics standards and calling the impartiality of the Supreme 
        Court of the United States into question by continuing to 
        participate in cases in which his prior public conduct could be 
        reasonably interpreted to demonstrate bias; and
            (2) demands Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., recuse 
        himself from all litigation related to the 2020 election or the 
        insurrection on January 6, 2021.
                                 <all>