Key facts
- Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito gained between $390,000 and $2.9 million from oil and gas interests between 2005 and 2024.
- The analysis was conducted by the non-profit advocacy group Court Accountability.
- The Supreme Court will hear a case on October 5 regarding federal law and lawsuits against fossil fuel producers for climate-warming effects.
- Alito's financial disclosures indicate his assets grew from approximately $1.1 million in 2005 to between $3.4 million and $8.4 million by 2024.
- Most of Alito's fossil fuel gains came from a mineral interest in Grady County, Oklahoma, held by his wife, Martha-Ann.
- Alito's wife leased the Oklahoma property to Citizen Energy, which was acquired by Validus Energy, a company with a majority stake held by Elliott Investment Management.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has potentially gained between $390,000 and $2.9 million from his fossil fuel interests since joining the high court in 2005, according to an analysis by the non-profit advocacy group Court Accountability. The findings come as the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on October 5 in a case where oil companies Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil are asking the court to rule that federal law prevents subnational governments from filing lawsuits against fossil fuel producers for the climate-warming effects of their products.
Court Accountability, which shared its analysis exclusively with The Guardian, stated that even at the lowest estimate, Alito has gained nearly $400,000 from his oil and gas investments since his 2005 nomination by President George W. Bush. The group and others have called for a Senate committee investigation into Alito, who is reportedly the only justice with holdings in energy companies, and urged him to recuse himself from relevant cases. However, the Supreme Court and Alito have rejected these calls, with a court spokesperson telling NBC News in May that Alito is not required to recuse himself from the Suncor lawsuit because his holdings do not include the specific companies named in the case.
Lisa Graves, co-founder of Court Accountability and the author of the analysis, argued that Alito's wealth tied to the oil industry raises questions about his impartiality in cases affecting the entire fossil fuel sector. She suggested that personal financial benefit could influence a justice's judgment. Alito's financial disclosures indicate his reported assets, excluding personal property, grew from approximately $1.1 million in 2005 to between $3.4 million and $8.4 million by 2024. Most of his gains from oil and gas came from a property in Grady County, Oklahoma, in which his wife, Martha-Ann, holds a mineral interest.
Graves noted that Alito may have undervalued this property, as an adjacent plot sold for $800,000 in 2017, suggesting the Alito property could be worth around that amount, though it was reported at $100,000 to $250,000. The justice reported significant rental income from this property in 2019 and 2022, with gains between $100,000 and $1 million in both years. His wife agreed to lease the land to the private oil and gas company Citizen Energy in 2022, which was later acquired for over $2 billion by Validus Energy, a company in which hedge fund Elliott Investment Management holds a majority stake. Elliott was founded by Paul Singer, who previously paid for a private jet ride for Alito in 2008 that the justice did not disclose.
Another substantial portion of Alito's fossil fuel gains stemmed from an inheritance of ExxonMobil stock valued between $100,000 and $250,000 in 2004. Graves stated this was the highest value of any single liquid investment Alito disclosed at the time. Although Alito appears to have since sold his ExxonMobil stock, Graves believes this should not allow him to sit on cases that could benefit the company. Alito is also noted to have had smaller investments in over a dozen other oil firms, including ConocoPhillips, Chevron, and Kinder Morgan. Graves argued that a reasonable person would question impartiality if an individual stands to benefit from the outcome of a lawsuit affecting the industry they are invested in.
Alito has a history of voting in favor of fossil fuel interests, including dissenting in the 2007 case Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and joining the majority in West Virginia v. EPA in 2022, which limited the EPA's authority to mandate a shift away from fossil fuels. He also joined decisions in 2024 that overturned the Chevron doctrine, potentially making it harder for agencies to defend environmental regulations. Alito has recused himself from other environmental cases, such as one concerning energy companies' responsibility for coastal degradation due to his stock in ConocoPhillips, a defendant. He also recused himself from considering a petition in the Suncor lawsuit in 2023, though that request was denied. The Supreme Court adopted its first ethics code in 2023, which states justices should recuse themselves when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, though the decision rests with the individual justice. Graves criticized the code as "toothless" but believes it should theoretically prevent Alito from participating in the Suncor v. Boulder case.