Justice Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr., appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006, is one of the Court’s most consistently conservative voices. Known for his detailed legal reasoning, strong defense of executive power, and skepticism of broad constitutional interpretations, Alito has played a major role in shaping American constitutional law in the 21st century.
 
Early Life and Education
 Samuel Alito was born on April 1, 1950, in Trenton, New Jersey. He was raised in a working-class, Roman Catholic family; his father was a schoolteacher and later a principal. Alito attended Princeton University, graduating in 1972, and went on to earn his J.D. from Yale Law School in 1975, where he served as editor of the Yale Law Journal.
 
His early experiences, including his opposition to anti-Vietnam War protests on campus, would later reflect in his conservative judicial philosophy and respect for authority and tradition.
 
Early Legal Career
After graduating from Yale, Alito began his legal career as a law clerk for Judge Leonard Garth of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He then served as an assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey from 1977 to 1981, where he prosecuted criminal cases, including drug trafficking and organized crime.
 
In 1981, he joined the Reagan administration as an Assistant to the Solicitor General, where he argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. From 1985 to 1987, he served in the Office of Legal Counsel in the U.S. Department of Justice, providing constitutional and legal advice to the executive branch. These roles helped establish Alito as a reliable and capable legal mind with strong conservative credentials.
 
U.S. Attorney and Judicial Appointment
In 1987, Alito returned to New Jersey to serve as the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, where he earned a reputation for fairness and efficiency. He prosecuted a range of high-profile cases, including political corruption and white-collar crime.
 
In 1990, President George H. W. Bush nominated Alito to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. As a judge, Alito was known for his careful, methodical opinions and consistent conservative rulings, particularly on issues like criminal law, religious liberty, and federalism.
 
Nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court
Following the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, President George W. Bush nominated Alito to the Supreme Court in October 2005, after the failed nomination of Harriet Miers. Alito’s confirmation was contentious, reflecting the growing political polarization over Supreme Court appointments. After a partisan Senate debate and a brief filibuster attempt, Alito was confirmed on January 31, 2006, by a vote of 58–42.
 
Judicial Philosophy and Major Opinions
Justice Alito is a conservative textualist and originalist, though his approach is often more pragmatic than rigid. He generally supports a limited role for the judiciary, strong deference to law enforcement and executive power, and strict interpretations of statutes and constitutional text.
 
On the Court, Alito has written or joined opinions that:

• Uphold religious liberty, including in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), where the Court ruled that closely held corporations could deny contraception coverage on religious grounds. Support gun rights, as in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), where he authored the majority opinion applying the Second Amendment to state governments.
• Oppose abortion rights, most notably in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), where Alito authored the majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. In this decision, he argued that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion and that such issues should be left to state legislatures—a landmark shift in constitutional law.
• Support free speech, including the controversial decision in Snyder v. Phelps (2011), where he dissented from the majority's protection of offensive protests at military funerals, citing the harm to private individuals.

Alito has also consistently ruled to limit affirmative action, expand executive authority, and rein in federal regulatory agencies, reflecting a broader conservative vision of constitutional structure.
 
Style and Impact
Unlike some of his colleagues, Alito is not known for seeking compromise or middle ground. His opinions are often sharply reasoned and unflinching, and he has been particularly vocal in dissent when he believes the majority has overstepped its bounds or misinterpreted the law.
 
Though often overshadowed by more prominent justices in the public eye, Alito has been a powerful and consistent voice in shaping conservative legal doctrine. His role became even more central as the Court’s ideological balance shifted further to the right in the late 2010s and early 2020s.
 
Legacy
Justice Alito’s legal career reflects a deep commitment to traditional constitutional interpretation, judicial restraint in policymaking, and the defense of conservative legal principles. As of 2025, he remains a leading force on the Court, with a legacy increasingly defined by major rulings on abortion, religious freedom, and federal power.

Justice Clarence Thomas, the second African American to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, has built a deeply influential and often controversial career shaped by a firm originalist interpretation of the Constitution. Appointed in 1991, he is the longest-serving current justice and one of the most ideologically conservative members of the Court.

Early Life and Education
Clarence Thomas was born on June 23, 1948, in Pin Point, Georgia, a small, impoverished African American community. He was raised by his grandfather in Savannah and educated in Catholic schools. Despite early struggles, Thomas excelled academically and went on to attend Holy Cross College, graduating in 1971, and then Yale Law School, where he received his J.D. in 1974.
Thomas has spoken critically of his experience at Yale, believing that affirmative action led some to assume he was admitted based on race rather than merit. This experience helped shape his later views on race, affirmative action, and equality under the law.

Early Legal and Government Career
After graduating, Thomas began his legal career as an assistant attorney general in Missouri, working under then-Attorney General John Danforth. When Danforth was elected to the U.S. Senate, Thomas followed him to Washington, serving as a legislative assistant. In 1981, Thomas joined the Reagan administration, first as Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education, and later as Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from 1982 to 1990.

As EEOC chairman, Thomas took a conservative approach to civil rights enforcement, focusing on individual rights over group protections. His time at the EEOC cemented his reputation as a principled conservative, skeptical of affirmative action and group-based remedies for discrimination.

Federal Judicial Appointment
In 1990, President George H. W. Bush appointed Thomas to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, often considered a stepping-stone to the Supreme Court. Thomas served just over a year on the appellate bench, authoring a small number of opinions that reflected his conservative legal philosophy and deference to executive power.

Nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court
In 1991, following the retirement of Justice Thurgood Marshall, President Bush nominated Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court. His confirmation process was highly contentious, culminating in televised hearings that focused on sexual harassment allegations by former colleague Anita Hill. Despite national controversy, Thomas was narrowly confirmed by a Senate vote of 52–48.

Judicial Philosophy and Influence
Justice Thomas is widely known for his originalist and textualist approach to constitutional interpretation. He believes the Constitution should be interpreted based on its original meaning at the time of ratification and has consistently argued for limited federal power, a strong separation of powers, and individual liberties rooted in the text and history of the Constitution.
Unlike some of his colleagues, Thomas is unafraid to call for overturning long-standing precedents if he believes they are inconsistent with the Constitution. He often authors concurring or dissenting opinions that push for more sweeping constitutional change than the majority is willing to accept.
He has written or joined opinions opposing affirmative action, limiting abortion rights, expanding gun rights, and narrowing the reach of federal regulatory power. Over time, many of his views—initially considered extreme—have become more mainstream within the Court's conservative majority.

​Legacy and Continued Influence
Despite a quiet demeanor during oral arguments (he rarely spoke for years), Thomas has become an intellectual leader of the Court’s conservative wing. Since the appointment of several right-leaning justices in the late 2010s and early 2020s, Thomas's legal philosophy has increasingly shaped the Court’s direction.
He is now widely regarded as one of the most consequential justices of the modern era, helping to redefine constitutional law in areas ranging from federalism and administrative law to race, religion, and individual rights.

My next few blog posts will be an effort to help you get to know our current US Supreme Court Justices.

​​John Glover Roberts, Jr., the 17th Chief Justice of the United States, has had a distinguished and influential legal career spanning several decades. Known for his intellect, legal craftsmanship, and institutionalist philosophy, Roberts has shaped American law as both a prominent appellate advocate and as the head of the U.S. Supreme Court since 2005.
Early Life and EducationBorn on January 27, 1955, in Buffalo, New York, Roberts grew up in Indiana. He excelled academically and later attended Harvard University, earning an undergraduate degree in history in 1976, followed by a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1979, where he was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review.
Clerkship and Early Government WorkRoberts began his legal career as a law clerk for Judge Henry Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. He then clerked for Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist during the 1980–1981 Supreme Court term—an experience that deeply influenced his judicial philosophy.
After clerking, Roberts entered government service under President Ronald Reagan, working as a Special Assistant to the U.S. Attorney General and later as Associate Counsel to the President from 1982 to 1986. During this period, he became known for his work on conservative legal issues, including federalism and judicial restraint.
Private Practice and Supreme Court AdvocacyRoberts transitioned to private practice in 1986, joining the prestigious law firm Hogan & Hartson (now Hogan Lovells), where he became a top appellate litigator. Over the next decade, he argued 39 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, winning a majority of them. His advocacy was characterized by clear, precise arguments and deep knowledge of constitutional law.
Notably, Roberts became a go-to lawyer for major corporations and the government in appellate matters. His ability to distill complex legal arguments and his calm demeanor made him one of the most respected advocates of his generation.
Return to Government and Judicial AppointmentIn 1989, under President George H. W. Bush, Roberts returned to government as Principal Deputy Solicitor General, where he represented the federal government before the Supreme Court. He continued to argue high-profile cases and built a reputation as a skilled and disciplined advocate.
Despite being nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 1992, the Senate did not act on the nomination before Bush left office. It wasn’t until 2003 that President George W. Bush successfully nominated him to the D.C. Circuit, widely considered the second-most powerful court in the nation. Roberts served there briefly but earned praise for his clear writing, moderate tone, and narrow, principled decisions.
Nomination as Chief JusticeIn 2005, President George W. Bush initially nominated Roberts to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. However, following the sudden death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Bush instead nominated Roberts to become Chief Justice of the United States. He was confirmed by the Senate on September 29, 2005, by a vote of 78–22.
Tenure as Chief JusticeAs Chief Justice, Roberts has steered the Court through a politically polarized era, often emphasizing the importance of judicial restraint and institutional legitimacy. He has frequently aimed to build consensus and has written many of the Court’s most consequential opinions.
Roberts has generally aligned with the conservative wing, but he has at times broken with ideological expectations. Notably, in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), he provided the pivotal vote to uphold the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate as a valid exercise of Congress's taxing power—a decision that drew both praise and criticism from across the political spectrum.
He has also sided with the liberal justices in high-profile cases involving abortion rights, DACA, and election law, demonstrating a tendency to prioritize institutional stability and narrow rulings over sweeping ideological change. His leadership style emphasizes incrementalism and maintaining the perception of the Court as an apolitical body.
In the wake of growing public scrutiny of the Supreme Court, Roberts has repeatedly defended the Court’s independence and integrity, warning against the perception of justices as political actors.
Legacy and InfluenceRoberts’s legal career reflects a deep commitment to the rule of law, careful legal reasoning, and respect for precedent. While he remains a conservative jurist, he is not an ideologue and often seeks to preserve the institutional credibility of the Court. His decisions and leadership style have made him a central figure in shaping modern constitutional law.
As of 2025, Roberts continues to lead the Court through complex legal and political terrain, often serving as a moderating force and a guardian of judicial norms.