Sam Alito has an oil money problem

On Monday, The Supreme Court announced it will hear a case about the fossil fuel industry’s responsibility for climate change. This is huge news for people who care about holding polluters accountable. The high court’s eventual decision could influence the future of dozens of lawsuits nationwide accusing oil, gas and coal companies of lying to the public about the risks of their products, and seeking financial compensation for climate disasters. If you want a breakdown of the specific case the Court agreed to review, and what the companies are trying to accomplish procedurally, I recommend reading this overview by Emily Sanders for ExxonKnews. Sanders has also done a lot of great work tracing how the oil industry is funding other efforts to kill climate cases. But today, I want to focus on something else: the fact that Justice Samuel Alito has not recused himself from the case, despite having reported significant financial investments in the fossil fuel industry. The conflict of interest is frankly astonishing, and I genuinely do not understand why it isn’t a bigger story. Justice Alito’s most recent financial disclosure reports ownership of 28 individual stocks—the most, by far, of any Supreme Court justice. Altogether, Alito’s individual stock investments are valued at approximately $645,000. (Note: federal disclosure forms report assets in broad value ranges—for example, “$15,001–$50,000”—rather than exact amounts. So, to estimate totals, I used the midpoint of each range. Example: For holdings listed as “$15,000 or less,” I used $7,500. For holdings listed as $15,001–$50,000, I used $32,500). Of that $645,000 portfolio, roughly $185,000 is invested in eight companies whose core business is fossil fuel extraction, refining, coal production, or fossil-fuel-powered utilities. That means nearly 30 percent of Alito’s individual stock portfolio is directly tied to the fossil fuel industry. Put another way: 8 of the 28 companies Alito personally invests in—more than one-quarter—are fossil fuel or fossil-fuel-dependent companies. Here’s the breakdown of Alito’s fossil fuel investments: $15,001 to $50,000 in Phillips 66, a major oil refining and midstream company and named defendant in several state climate liability lawsuits. $15,000 or less in ConocoPhillips, a major U.S. oil and gas exploration and production company and named defendant in several state climate liability lawsuits. $15,001 to $50,000 in OGE Energy, a holding company for Oklahoma Gas & Electric, which generates electricity largely from natural gas and other fossil fuels. $15,000 or less in Woodside Energy Group, one of Australia’s largest oil and liquefied natural gas producers. $15,000 or less in AES Corporation, a power generation company that operates natural gas and coal-fired plants. $15,001 to $50,000 in Black Hills Corporation, utility that distributes natural gas, with a significant portion of its power supply coming from fossil fuels. $15,001 to $50,000 in Fortis Inc, a utility holding company that owns electric and gas utilities. $15,001 to $50,000 in BHP Biliton PLC ADR, a global mining giant that produces metallurgical coal used in steelmaking. I will also note that I did not include any of Alito’s investments in major petrochemical manufacturers on this list, even though those companies rely heavily on petroleum and natural gas to make plastics, chemicals, and agricultural products. Alito also has investments in Dupont, Dow, and Corteva. The petitioners in the climate case before the Supreme Court are Exxon and Suncor Energy. Alito is not personally invested in either of those companies, which is perhaps why he hasn’t recused himself, as he has in other cases involving the fossil fuel industry. But the Supreme Court’s decision in this case won’t just affect Exxon and Suncor—it will affect the entire fossil fuel industry. That’s not even according to me; it’s according to the American Petroleum Institute, the country’s largest oil and gas trade association, which filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court for this case. In their brief, API was clear: “This case will have broad implications for the entire petroleum and natural-gas industry. ”If Respondents’ claims were to succeed, the results would be disastrous … for the energy industry.” ”Ad hoc sanctioning and regulation of energy companies will destabilize the whole sector.” In addition, Alito holds stock in two companies that are consistently getting sued over climate change in state court. Phillips 66 and ConocoPhillips are both plaintiffs in several climate liability lawsuits, including ones filed by New Jersey, California, and Chicago. These are the exact type of lawsuits that will be affected by the Supreme Court’s decision. And they’re the reason why Alito should recuse himself from this case. The Supreme Court is supposed to be the last line of defense against the corrupting influence of money in public life. But when a justice holds hundreds of thousands of dollars in the very industry whose fate he’s being asked to decide, that defense entirely disappears. Recusal exists precisely for moments like this. The ethical path is clear. The question is whether anyone with power will say so out loud. Correction: A previous version of this story listed Alito’s average investments in fossil fuels as $197,500. The correct number is $185,000. Are you a parent navigating a climate-changed world with children? The 19th’s climate reporter Jessica Kutz wants to hear from you. From school closures due to extreme weather, to more frequent disasters that uproot family life, to rising health concerns, climate change is affecting so many aspects of parenting. Kutz wants to know: How is it affecting you and your family? If you have 30 minutes to connect with Jessica during a one-on-one Zoom or phone call, please complete this short form. She’ll be in touch with more details!