As the Democrats continue their crusade against the United States Supreme Court, the party’s allies in the corporate media are rebooting old hoaxes about conservative justices on the SCOTUS.
The Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Roberts took over writing the opinion in a major Jan. 6 case as leftists attempted to tie one of his conservative colleagues to the protests at the U.S. Capitol.
The new details were supposedly leaked to the New York Times.
The left-wing newspaper speculates that Roberts’ move was prompted by the NY Times’s reporting on flags flown at Justice Samuel Alito’s house.
The court ruled 6-3 in the case, Fischer v. United States.
The justices determined the Department of Justice had stretched the law to prosecute certain Jan. 6 participants charged with “obstruction of an official proceeding.”
The obstruction statute was also used by Special Counsel Jack Smith in his Jan. 6 case against President Donald Trump.
The high court held that charges of “obstruction of an official proceeding” must be tied to the destruction of physical documents or evidence.
As legal scholar Jonathan Turley noted at the time, the ruling meant that Jan. 6 was “downgraded” from an “insurrection” to merely “trespassing.”
In a surprise move, President Biden appointee Ketanji Brown Jackson sided with the conservative majority.
In addition, conservative Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, joined the dissent.
The Times article, written in the style of an exposé, paints Roberts as having strong-armed the court to hand Trump victories in a trio of election-year disputes.
Roberts sent out a confidential memo early on in the court’s deliberations over presidential immunity, in which he expressed strong disapproval of a lower court’s cavalier approach to the historic case.
He also pushed for a unanimous ruling in the case dealing with leftist efforts to keep Trump off the ballot.
In Fischer, Roberts took over writing the majority opinion after he initially gave the role to Alito.
At the time, Alito was the target of an anti-Trump corporate media campaign.
The “controversy” was over the Times’s reporting on an inverted flag that Alito’s wife flew at their home.
The Times called the timing of Robert’s decision “suggestive” but conceded “it is unclear whether the two are linked.”
Inverted flags have a long history as an American protest symbol.
More recently, however, they have been used by Trump supporters to protest the 2020 election results.
Nevertheless, Alito’s wife, Martha-Ann Bomgardner, was not flying the flags to protest the election results.
Further, her decision to fly the flags had nothing to do with her husband or his beliefs.
The claims that Alito and his wife flew the flags to protest the election are widely considered to be a Democrat-led hoax.
Democrats pushing the claims are hoping that Altio will be forced to recuse himself from the Supreme Court’s Jan. 6 cases.
Alito refused to step aside from the Jan. 6 cases.
He argues that his wife’s political expression had no bearing on his work as a justice.
“My wife is a private citizen, and she possesses the same First Amendment rights as every other American,” he added.
In light of Fischer, the DOJ has dropped about half of its obstruction cases.
READ MORE – Liberal ‘Christian’ Group Launches Effort to Remove Samuel Alito from Supreme Court
