Democrats and their allies in the liberal media are desperately working to undermine the U.S. Supreme Court and blunt its conservative edge. This public-private campaign has been focused on painting Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas as ideologically compromised culture warriors, incapable of weighing impartially on cases relating to the Jan. 6 protests or to former President Donald Trump.

The same partisans who were silent in April on the matter of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's partiality in the Idaho case related to gender, have impotently demanded in recent weeks that Alito recuse himself from various cases — cases in which House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), and other critics are politically invested.

Getting increasingly desperate and having failed to manufacture sufficient outrage over Alito's American flag and divestment from Bud Light's parent company, the public-private campaigners found another item to take issue with: the "Appeal to Heaven" flag, which was allegedly flown over the justice's New Jersey beach house last summer.

This latest attack, centering on a flag designed by an aide-de-camp to then-General George Washington and flown by American patriots in the Revolutionary War and patriots since, may similarly prove fruitless.

Background

Blaze News previously reported that Obama hagiographer Jodi Kantor kicked off the latest leg of the private-public campaign on May 16 with a piece in the New York Times entitled, "At Justice Alito's House, a 'Stop the Steal' Symbol on Display."

The so-called "Stop the Steal" symbol in question was the American flag, which Alito's wife, Martha-Ann Alito, supposedly flew "in response to a neighbor's use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs."

Alito told the times he had nothing to do with the incident and Kantor produced no evidence tying the alleged flag inversion to support for the Jan. 6 protests. That did not, however, stop Kantor from insinuating a connection, leaning upon the interpretation of a partisan neighbor and adopting the accusatory framing of leftist "experts."

Once the Times established the narrative, Democratic lawmakers ran with it.

'He must recuse himself from cases involving the 2020 election and former President Donald Trump.'

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said, "Justice Alito should recuse himself immediately from cases related to the 2020 election and the January 6th insurrection, including the question of the former President's immunity in U.S. v. Donald Trump, which the Supreme Court is currently considering."

Adopting the same script, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement, "Samuel Alito should apologize immediately for disrespecting the American flag and sympathizing with right-wing violent insurrectionists. He must recuse himself from cases involving the 2020 election and former President Donald Trump."

The Times followed up with another piece building upon Kantor's initial framing with the help of former Marshall Project activist Abbie Vansickle.

Various other Democrats and leftist publications joined in, suggesting that Alito's future involvement in cases even peripherally related to Trump or Jan. 6 would shake public confidence in the Supreme Court.

Failing to arouse the mass indignation they apparently wanted, the public-private campaign tried a new angle on Monday. Law Dork published a blog post entitled, "Justice Alito sold Bud Light stock amidst anti-trans boycott effort."

CNBC and other left-leaning outlets carried this story along with the suggestion that Alito's divestment from Anheuser-Busch InBev — months after it became clear the company would not soon recover from the boycott over its collaboration with a transvestite activist — was "suspicious" and again evidence of partisanship on the justice's part.

"If the sale was in response to the Bud Light controversy last year, he might have an appearance-of-bias problem when it comes to future court cases related to trans rights," Gave Roth, executive director of leftist activist outfit Fix the Court, told CNBC.

Forty-five Democrats sent Alito a letter Tuesday demanding he reuse himself from the cases of Trump v. United States and Fischer v. United States, complaining that his decisions might otherwise "profoundly affect the future of a past and potentiality future President, and of democracy itself."

Again, their efforts appear to have been in vain.

Another offending flag

Kantor penned another alarmist piece Wednesday, this time aided by former Bellingcat research director Aric Toler and former Washington Post researcher Julie Tate.

'[The justices'] decisions will shape how accountable [Trump] can be held for trying to overturn the last presidential election and his chances at regaining the White House in the next one.'

The article again insinuates political bias on the part of Alito, and a link between the justice and Jan. 6 on the basis of his alleged possession and hoisting of a nonpartisan flag of historic significance.

In July and September 2023, someone snapped a photo of "An Appeal to Heaven" flag allegedly flying above Alito's New Jersey beach house.

Long before the New York Times decided it was controversial, the U.S. National Park Service indicated why a maritime residence might be an appropriate spot to hoist such a flag: "This particular flag became familiar on the seas as the ensign of the cruisers commissioned by General Washington and was noted by many English newspapers of the time."

Ahead of the 2019 National Day of Prayer, Republican Illinois state Rep. Chris Miller's office noted that this flag, which features a pine tree along with the Lockean motto "An Appeal to Heaven" or "An Appeal to God," was "used originally by a squadron of six cruiser ships commissioned under George Washington’s authority as commander in chief of the Continental Army in October 1775."

"The design of the flag came from General Washington's secretary, Colonel Joseph Reed," continued the statement from Miller's office.

The pine tree had long been a New England symbol being depicted on the Flag of New England flown by colonial merchant ships dating back to 1686. Leading up to the Revolutionary War it became a symbol of Colonial ire and resistance. The colonists resented the restrictions on the timber used for their needs and livelihoods. Prohibitions were disregarded and they practiced 'Swamp Law,' where the pines were harvested according to their needs regardless of statutes.

In New Hampshire enforcement led to the Pine Tree Riot in 1772, one of the first acts of forceful protest against British policies. It occurred almost two years prior to the more well-known Boston Tea Party protest and three years before open hostilities began at the Battles of Lexington and Concord. The pine tree was also used on the flag that the Colonists flew at the Battle of Bunker Hill in June 1775.

Ted Kaye, secretary for the North American Vexillological Association, told the Associated Press that the Massachusetts Navy adopted the pine tree flag in 1776 and used it until 1971.

Jared Holt, a senior analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue — a foreign think tank that has been accused of labeling mainstream conservative views as disinformation — told the Associated Press this historic flag has been linked to a "patriot" movement that obsesses over the Founding Fathers and the American Revolution.

"Others adhere to a Christian nationalist worldview that seeks to elevate Christianity in public life," the liberal outlet warned, echoing Holt who went on to call Alito's alleged flying of the flag "alarming."

Holt, evidently ready with a blanket accusation, said that those who fly the flag tend to support "more intolerant and restrictive forms of government aligned with a specific religious philosophy."

Former Vice President Mike Pence, no fan of the Jan. 6 protesters, has underscored that the flag is part of "our proud heritage of Faith and Freedom and every American should be proud to fly it."

In her piece for the Times, Kantor concern-mongered that the same justice who allegedly flew this historic American flag will rule on a case that "could scuttle some of the charges against Mr. Trump, as well as on whether he is immune from prosecution for actions he took while president."

'This is a threat to the rule of law and a serious breach of ethics, integrity, and Justice Alito's oath of office.'

Kantor appears to clarify what is ultimately at the heart of the effort to neutralize Alito, referenced also in Democratic lawmakers' Tuesday letter: "[The justices'] decisions will shape how accountable [Trump] can be held for trying to overturn the last presidential election and his chances at regaining the White House in the next one."

Once again, Democrats are doing their part.

House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) — whose adult son was arrested and charged in January 2023 with assault and battery on a Boston police officer — said in a statement Thursday, "Justice Alito has displayed flags at his homes that support insurrection against our government, promote religious nationalism, and attack free and fair elections."

"This is not just another example of extremism that has overtaken conservatism. This is a threat to the rule of law and a serious breach of ethics, integrity, and Justice Alito's oath of office," continued Clark, absent any confirmation Alito flew the flag. "At minimum, he must recuse himself from any cases involving January 6th, Donald Trump, and the security of our elections. Anything less will tarnish our judicial system and democracy."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!