Washingtonpost.com: (Dana Milbank)
The associate justice, a George W. Bush appointee, read two opinions, both 5-4 decisions that split the court along its usual right-left divide. But Alito didn’t stop there. When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg read her dissent from the bench, Alito visibly mocked his colleague.
Ginsburg, the second woman to serve on the high court, was making her argument about how the majority opinion made it easier for sexual harassment to occur in the workplace when Alito, seated immediately to Ginsburg’s left, shook his head from side to side in disagreement, rolled his eyes and looked at the ceiling.
His treatment of the 80-year-old Ginsburg, 17 years his elder and with 13 years more seniority, was a curious display of judicial temperament or, more accurately, judicial intemperance. Typically, justices state their differences in words — and Alito, as it happens, had just spoken several hundred of his own from the bench. But he frequently supplements words with middle-school gestures.
Days earlier, I watched as he demonstrated his disdain for Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, the two other women on the court. Kagan, the newest justice, prefaced her reading of an opinion in a low-profile case by joking that it was “possibly not” the case the audience had come to hear. The audience responded with laughter, a few justices smiled — and Alito, seated at Kagan’s right elbow, glowered.
Another time, Sotomayor, reading a little-watched case about water rights, joked that “every student in the audience is going to look up the word ‘preemption’ today.” Alito rolled his eyes and shook his head.
Alito is best known for his antics at the 2010 State of the Union address, when President Obama criticized the Citizens United decision. While other justices remained expressionless, Alito adopted a sour look, shook his head “no” and appeared to mouth the words “not true.” At the various oral arguments I’ve watched over the past few years, Alito’s eye-rolling, head-shaking and other expressions of exasperation are a fairly common occurrence, most often when Sotomayor has the floor.
Is Justice a misogynist or just a rude horse’s ass? He is a national figure. He needs to set a better example for the people, some of whom are children, while they visit the highest court in the land. There is just no room for such infantile behavior from a person who is positioned for life in the Supreme Court. I am embarrassed for him. Sadly, there is nothing we can do about it. When one is over 60 years of age, we expect better behavior. Alito was born in 1950.
In particular, Justice Ginsberg should be shown more respect than he gives her because of her age. That’s just the American thing to do. Secondly, his hostility towards women speaks volumes. His behavior shames his parents, his ancestors, the Court and his alma mater. Hopefully, the other justices will pull him aside and insist that he act with the dignity and decorum that one expects of a Supreme Court Justice.
Well stated, Moon
Alito shook his head AND rolled his eyes. To the fainting couches, stat!
Something makes me think Ginsberg is made of strong enough stuff that she can ignore something like this. We should all follow her example.
As for respect, she’s a Supreme Court justice. She should be respected by regular folk like you and me. But among the other justices, it’s a different story. It’s the same reason why it would be disrespectful for me to address Obama as “Barack” in person but it wouldn’t be for Bill Clinton or George Bush. She should be respected for her position, not her age or genitals.
Now furby, I dont think I mentioned her genitals, did I?
I don’t care if any of them respect each other in their minds. I care very much that they show respect TO each other. I wouldn’t expect Kagan to put her fingers in her ears and go La la la if Scalia spoke either.
Furby, as a vintage woman, I feel strongly that older people should be shown respect by those younger. Actually I have always felt that way. I was taught to respect my elders by my parents. In particular, Justice Ginsburg should be shown respect. The fact that she is there at age 80 mandates it. I felt the same way about Justice Stevens. (not going to mention his genitals either)
We are in agreement that Ginsberg’s genitals have nothing to do with this. But you did say Alito was misogynist which is a “genitals” question.
I don’t have a problem with the younger set showing some deference to age, but Alito is in his 60s. In my book, they are peers. Peers in the job and peers in age. Sure 80 is older than 60-something, but they are both in the AARP generation.
I still don’t see much that’s worth a fuss over. Alito shook his head and rolled his eyes. Who cares?
People in their 60’s do not look at octogenarians as peers.
Alito has a history of showing disrespect to women. Plus, fuzzy one, it was a question….
Alito makes a habit of acting like a petulant middle schooler. Some of us don’t like that. So to answer YOUR question, I care. Does that mean you vote for horse’s ass rather than misogynist?
Totally disrespectful, immature, and dismissive of his peers. I can only imagine what he does behind closed doors.
@Pat.Herve
Amen!
Ok. To each his own. It just seems like such a minor thing to get worked up over. I really doubt it had anything to do with Ginsberg’s age or her gender. I’d be willing to bet it was entirely based on ideology.
So, yes, I guess I’d go with horse’s ass over misogynist, but I’d probably down grade it to “bit of a jerk”.
I just expect people who hold such an important position, for life even, to have good deportment while in public. He should be a role model.
The Supremes really do have some issues now. I want Sandra Day O’Connor back.
I would expect a Supreme Court judge to know that he’s supposed to
have a poker face. Isn’t that the rule?
I thought he was remarkably restrained at the SOTU considering he was having his integrity smeared on national TV by a pathological liar and professional demagogue.
Also, doesn’t senility relieve us somewhat from the traditional obligation of reverence toward seniors?
Ruth Ginsburg is far from senile.
Actually I feel exactly the opposite. Alito was infantile.
We know you don’t like the current president. However, please don’t call him a pathological liar and professional demagogue on this blog. There are lots of blogs out there that eat that crap up. This isnt one of them.
Actually if that is all it takes to besmirch Alito’s integrity he had better grow thicker hide. His integrity was definitely not besmirched.
@Cato the Elder
No!
Alito can’t use senility as a defense, Cato. He seems sharp enough. The problem is that he doesn’t fully appreciate the need for judicial temperament. In my work I have occasion to go the Court a few times each Term and have done so for many years. He is the only Justice I have ever noticed visibly acting disrespectful to another Justice. In talking with SC clerks and staff over the years, I generally hear that the Justices get along well personally with each other (there are a few notable exceptions) and often have very warm friendships even across philosophical divides. I sense that Alito is not such a person and that he has somehow picked up the political hostility that seems to hang in the zeitgeist these days. I consider him an able judge, fully qualified by education, experience and intellect to sit where he sits and to do what he does. However, the demeanor issues are troubling, whether on the bench or at the State of the Union. The Chief should have a word with him (and I assume that has already happened at least once).
I think my choice of the word “disrespectful” was possibly disrespectful. To know whether that is accurate, one would have to know what’s inside Alito, J.’s head. I don’t know. The better phrase would have been that he looks annoyed with his colleagues on the bench from time to time. Even that should be kept under wraps at the Supreme Court level, but it may not be that he intends a lack of respect.
True, but he appears to be disrespectful. He needs to change that behavior so he doesn’t give that appearance.
That incident at the State of the Union started with a uncalled for and infantile remark from the podium.
Let’s check that out. Infantile? I don’t think so. Many Americans feel that Citizens United was a horrible decision.
Regardless, President Obama is the President of the United States. He should be given the respect entitled to the office, regardless of what an individual thinks of him (Or President Bush or any other president)
In particular, a sitting Supreme Court Justice should show respect, regardless of how he or she feels.
What any Americans think of Citizens United is not in play here. It is a question of common courtesy. The justices are guests of the Congress for the SOTUS, and the President has no business attacking their decisions in that venue. There is a time and a place for that — like in one of his own press conferences.
All presidents speak to their issues during the State of the Union Address. This isn’t the good ship Lollipop. He didnt “attack” thheir decision. He said he didn’t like it and why. It was a split decision. I suppose the minority was also offended? I don’t think so. The decision very much affects the ‘state of the union.’
Again, its just really bad form to talk back to the President. I don’t care who the president is. I wouldn’t do it. It’s rude, crude and socially unattractive.
You really are employing situational ethics on this one. There is a certain decorum that is afforded the person holding that office. Alito violated manners expected of someone of his station. Alito displayed infantile behavior, again.
“He didn’t ‘attack’ their decision. He said he didn’t like it….” Splitting hairs here? Bad manners on the part of your guy, I would say. It was a slap at the SCOTUS at the wrong time and the wrong place. Rarely, if ever, seen in that venue, which is why you have that video of it. Bad manners on the part of POTUS and also bad manners on the part of those Dems applauding in the ears of the justices. I will, however, give some creds to John Kerry. He is also applauding but he at least looks rather uncomfortable about it.
I will posit that, in the past 4-5 months, this administration has indeed turned into the “”Good Ship Lollipop.”
I can state dislike of something without attacking it. Ever been to one of those things? The entire State of the Union is recorded. It isn’t selective.
You know, the bottom line is, the President, whoever it is at the time, is the leader of the country. A supreme court justice is an underling, according to logic and to protocol. Alito was a rude little piss ant. In some countries, he would have been shot.
Why are you trying to defend the indefensible or are you trying to deflect the attention off the fact that he makes fun and rolls his eyes at his colleagues? Most of us were taught by our parents not to do that.
A President is not bound to live with a Supreme Court decision that he considers unwise, unjust or not in the interests of the United States if he can contrive and execute on a solution that passes constitutional muster. It not infrequently happens that the Court will indicate in a decision that the Congress can act to modify or moderate the impacts of a decision, but that the Court bound by existing law.
Obama’s remark was delivered in a dignified and proper manner. Alito took it upon himself, in a setting where cameras were bound to observe it, to engage in a debate with the President’s characterization of Citizen’s United. Judges don’t do that. They speak in their written opinions. They should otherwise be sphinx-like in public. Lately a few of them have taken to doing interviews at law schools and similar venues. I’m not all that comfortable with that, but Alito could have waited for that kind of opportunity if he wanted to spar with the President.
I agree 100%, Scout. I would agree regardless of whom the president was at the time also. You are right, President Obama was dignified and courteous in his speech and he is under no obligation to remain silent on something he feels harms the country.
I am not comfortable with the justices speaking at various law schools either, when their policy discussions become partisan. I think they need to stick to “what its like to sit on the Supreme Court.”