Alito’s Oil Stock Holdings Prompt Senate Ethics Inquiry

Watchdog groups sent a May 14, 2026 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee urging an investigation of Justice Samuel Alito’s role in a February 2026 case by Suncor Energy and Exxon that seeks to bar state/local governments from suing oil firms for climate harms. Alito did not recuse despite holding oil stock.

The Guardian

The Court adopted a formal ethics code in 2023 that requires recusal when impartiality could be questioned, but lets each justice decide and provides no enforcement. In 2026 the Court added software that scans filings for ticker symbols to flag possible conflicts. It remains unclear whether Alito has sold any oil holdings since his 2024 disclosure, and the Court has not revealed which justices supported hearing the Suncor petition.

The Guardian

Key dates: 2008 – Alito took a private-jet fishing trip to Alaska paid by donor Paul Singer; June 2023 – ProPublica reported it; 2023 – Alito recused from a prior petition and the Court adopted its ethics code; 2024 – Alito’s disclosure listed oil holdings; Feb 2026 – the Court agreed to hear the Suncor/Exxon petition without Alito recusing.

The Guardian

Alito’s 2024 filing lists $60,007–$245,000 in ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66 and five other stocks, plus up to $100,000 in a Vanguard fund where Exxon is the third-largest holder. Singer’s Elliott fund holds >52 million Suncor shares worth >$2.3 billion, and over 70 governments have sued oil majors over climate impacts.

The Guardian

Lisa Graves called the recusal loophole “outrageous.” Alito defended the 2008 Singer-funded trip, saying ethics rules did not require disclosure and he had no duty to recuse. Coalition called his participation an “indefensible breach of ethical boundaries.”

The Guardian

Critics say the Court’s model is “toothless,” letting justices decide conflicts alone, and argue a “blanket refusal” is the only consistent ethical response given the impact of climate-accountability suits on the oil sector.

The Guardian

• “No judge on any court, including the high court, should be allowed to hear cases where he or she have a financial stake in those cases,” — Lisa Graves, True North Research

The Guardian

• “ProPublica suggests that my failure to recuse in these cases created an appearance of impropriety, but that is incorrect.” — Samuel Alito

The Guardian

• “Alito’s decision to reverse course and participate in granting the companies’ most recent petition – when a finding in favor of the companies could directly and indirectly benefit both himself and his billionaire friend – is an indefensible breach of ethical boundaries.” — Watchdog coalition letter

The Guardian

• “A blanket refusal is the only consistently ethical option for Alito when faced with any of these parallel cases,” — Hannah Story Brown, Revolving Door Project

The Guardian

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to hold hearings on the alleged conflict. Justices must file 2026 financial disclosures next year, and the Court’s conflict-identification software will be applied to future filings, potentially prompting further recusal requests.

The Guardian