WSJ publishes 'weird' attempt by Justice Alito to preempt ProPublica report on Supreme Court recusal

The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday published an op-ed by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in what appeared to be an effort to preempt an upcoming ProPublica report that raises questions about Alito’s failure to recuse himself from a case involving hedge fund magnate Paul Singer, as well as allegations that Alito failed to “list certain items as gifts” on his 2008 financial disclosures.

Although ProPublica’s report has yet to be published, Alito’s description of the charges "leveled" against him makes it clear the story echoes recent investigations into Justice Clarence Thomas. Earlier this year, ProPublica released a number of bombshell reports that detailed Thomas’ failure to report lavish gifts from his billionaire benefactor Harlan Crow, among other allegations.

“ProPublica has leveled two charges against me,” Alito wrote in Tuesday’s op-ed. “First, that I should have recused in matters in which an entity connected with Paul Singer was a party and, second, that I was obligated to list certain items as gifts on my 2008 Financial Disclose [sic] Report.”

READ MORE: Busted: Analysis reveals billionaire Clarence Thomas benefactor gave millions to dark money groups

“Neither charge is valid,” Alito insisted.

Alito claimed he “had no obligation to recuse” himself in cases connected to Singer as he’s spoken to Singer “on no more than a handful of occasions” — “with the exception of small talk during a fishing trip 15 years ago” (emphasis ours) — and that he “had no good reason to be aware that Singer had an interest in any party” before the Court.

“As I will discuss, [Singer] allowed me to occupy what would have otherwise been an unoccupied seat on a private flight to Alaska,” Alito wrote, later arguing that he was not required to disclose the flight on his Financial Disclosure Report as “until a few months ago, the instructions for completing a Financial Disclosure Report told judges that ‘[p]ersonal hospitality need not be reported.’”

READ MORE: Harlan Crow’s lawyer agrees to meet with Senate Judiciary members

“When I joined the Court and until the recent amendment of the filing instructions, justices commonly interpreted this discussion of ‘hospitality’ to mean that accommodations and transportation for social events were not reportable gifts,” Alito argued. “The flight to Alaska was the only occasion when I have accepted transportation for a purely social event, and in doing so I followed what I understood to be standard practice.”

NBC News Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley described Alito’s Wall Street Journal op-ed as “weird.”

“Weird for a judge to publish an opinion piece in response to another news org's story instead of just putting out a statement,” Hurley wrote on Twitter. “Don’t recall ever seeing that.”

READ MORE: 'Ethics-free zone': Senate Judiciary member says Congress 'absolutely can' impose reforms on SCOTUS

The reporter also called into question Alito’s claim that he was not aware of Singer’s relation to matters before the Court.

“Alito rejects notion that he should have recused in cases Singer was involved in, including one in which the court ruled in favor of a unit of Singer's hedge fund, saying he had no awareness of Singer's role,” Hurley wrote.

“Singer was mentioned in pretty much every news story about that case,” the reporter noted.

READ MORE: 'False and unsubstantiated': Georgia elections board clears 2 poll workers of Trump-backed fraud claims

Read the op-ed at the Wall Street Journal (subscription required).