Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(172,814 posts)
Mon Jun 8, 2026, 03:12 PM 5 hrs ago

Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito Sit Out Supreme Court Decisions

Source: Newsweek

Published. Jun 08, 2026 at 12:17 PM EDT updated Jun 08, 2026 at 12:18 PM EDT


Two U.S. Supreme Court justices declined to take part in decisions released Monday tied to federal appeals cases around a firearms conviction and pensions payments. Conservative Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito each sat out separate matters connected to lower-court rulings—moves that were not formally explained but align with long-standing judicial practice aimed at avoiding potential conflicts.

What Happened

Barrett recused herself from a decision tied to a Seventh Circuit case involving federal inmate Eural Black, while Alito did not participate in a Fourth Circuit-related case concerning a retirement benefits dispute between a former employee and companies linked to DuPont and Corteva.

In the Black case, the Seventh Circuit ruled that a man serving a lengthy sentence tied to "stacked" firearm convictions could not secure a reduction based on changes made by the First Step Act. Black argued that the gap between his sentence and what he would receive today should qualify as an "extraordinary and compelling" reason for early release. The court held that its own precedent still barred using those sentencing reforms as a basis for compassionate release, even after a new policy from the U.S. Sentencing Commission suggested otherwise.

In the other case, Gasper v. EIDP, Inc., the Fourth Circuit sided with corporate defendants in a dispute over pension payments. Plaintiff David Gasper argued his monthly retirement benefit had been improperly reduced following his divorce, but the court found the plan administrator’s method of spreading the cost of a survivor benefit across the total pension was valid. The Fourth Circuit also rejected Gasper’s claim for penalties over delayed document disclosures, finding no evidence of harm or bad faith. Both appellate rulings were affirmed, meaning the lower court decisions stood in full.

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/amy-coney-barrett-samuel-alito-sit-out-supreme-court-decisions-12044858

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito Sit Out Supreme Court Decisions (Original Post) BumRushDaShow 5 hrs ago OP
This message was self-deleted by its author wcmagumba 5 hrs ago #1
vehemently disagree quakerboy 4 hrs ago #2
So now they recuse? Guess Nov is looming large even for those hacks. tazcat 3 hrs ago #3
Making a mountain out of a molehill? onenote 3 hrs ago #4
There's a nifty tracking site on the SCOTUS recusals (or refusals) BumRushDaShow 2 hrs ago #5

Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

quakerboy

(14,919 posts)
2. vehemently disagree
Mon Jun 8, 2026, 04:05 PM
4 hrs ago

When a judge has a conflict of interest, they should definitely sit it out.

This is probably the most responsible, ethical thing either of these judges will do while on the court.

onenote

(46,280 posts)
4. Making a mountain out of a molehill?
Mon Jun 8, 2026, 05:43 PM
3 hrs ago

First, recusals are not unheard of, particularly at the petition for certiorari stage. Even more to the point, Alito's recusal in the EIDP case wasn't even on a wphether to grant or deny a etition for certiorari. It merely was on a motion for leave to file a petition for certiorari with the supplemental appendix under seal -- which was granted.

As noted, such recusals aren not unusual. For example, on May 26, Jackson and Alito each recused themselves from decisions on whether to grant or deny a petition for certiorari and Kagan recused herself from a decision on whether to grant rehearing of a case.

BumRushDaShow

(172,814 posts)
5. There's a nifty tracking site on the SCOTUS recusals (or refusals)
Mon Jun 8, 2026, 06:15 PM
2 hrs ago
https://fixthecourt.com/2026/04/recent-times-justice-failed-recuse-despite-clear-conflict-interest/

It goes back to 2014 (and their earliest entries that say "FTC not founded yet" is referring to their own organization,"Fix The Court" and not the "Federal Trade Commission" ).
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Amy Coney Barrett and Sam...