Samuel Alito Breaks With Majority in Ex-Clerk's Supreme Court Election Case

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito voted against an argument made by one of his former law clerks in one of the Court's biggest decisions this term.

On Tuesday, the Court rejected the "independent state legislature theory" (ISL) advanced by North Carolina Republicans in the Moore v. Harper case.

In a 6-3 vote, justices ruled that North Carolina's Supreme Court had the authority to strike down a congressional map drawn in the GOP-led state Legislature for alleged gerrymandering. The map, which passed in a party-line vote in 2021, awarded 10 seats to Republicans and four to Democrats.

The lawsuit, brought by state House Speaker Tim Moore, argued that the state Supreme Court does not have the authority to reject the map under ISL, which maintains that state courts and state constitutions are powerless in federal elections. Moore was represented by attorneys from Cooper & Kirk, including Megan Wold, who served as a law clerk to Alito.

Alito was among the three conservative justices who dissented from the majority opinion, writing that the case should have been dismissed as "indisputably moot" because of new state-level developments that reversed the previous ruling from North Carolina's Supreme Court.

"Today's majority opinion is plainly advisory," the dissent reads.

The majority opinion, however, said that the case was not moot and rejected ISL outright.

Former federal prosecutor and elected state attorney Michael McAuliffe told Newsweek that the dissenting justices, by arguing the case was moot, were likely trying to prevent the Supreme Court from issuing a "substantive opinion" that would reject ISL.

"The majority opinion, 6-3, authored by the chief justice creates a binding precedent in the matter for the issues raised and addressed by the Court," McAuliffe said.

"The dissent appeared to not want to create a precedent in the case. That could be because they thought the principle of mootness required the case be rejected, or it also may be a tactical move to prevent a substantive opinion being issued," he said.

Although Alito joined Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch in the dissent, he stopped short of endorsing ISL, unlike his two conservative colleagues.

Alito, who has recently been the center of an ethics controversy, has several ties to Cooper & Kirk, according to the nonpartisan group Accountable.US. Not only was Wold a former clerk for the justice, but the firm's chairman is a longtime friend and former colleague of Alito's.

Newsweek reached out to Wold by email for comment.

Last week, Alito became the latest justice to face questions over his ethical conduct after ProPublica published a story revealing that he failed to recuse himself from cases with ties to hedge fund founder Paul Singer, who reportedly took Alito on a luxury fishing vacation that the justice did not detail in his mandatory annual financial disclosure forms.

Alito has defended himself, saying that the flight to their Alaska trip was "the only occasion" where he accepted transportation for a social event and that he had "no obligation" to recuse himself.