Justice Samuel Alito has repeatedly turned past dissents into the Supreme Court’s majority positions, most notably in the Dobbs decision that overturned federal abortion protections. Though increasingly influential, he often displays visible impatience and publicly rebukes critics—both from colleagues and the media. Recent rulings on redistricting, campaign finance and executive-power disputes highlight his role in reshaping doctrine while underscoring the tense dynamic his temperament introduces on the Court.
Why Samuel Alito Wins — Yet Often Appears Aggrieved: The Justice Reshaping the Supreme Court
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito attends an event organized by the US Embassy to the Holy See, in Rome, Italy, on September 20, 2025. - Vincenzo Livieri/Reuters/File
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has repeatedly turned past dissents into the Court’s majority positions, reshaping doctrine on abortion, voting rights and executive power. Yet despite—or perhaps because of—his outsized legal influence, Alito frequently projects impatience and a sense of grievance, both in written opinions and during oral arguments.
A Record of Reversals and Influence
Since joining the Court in 2006 as the successor to Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Alito has been a pivotal conservative vote in many closely divided cases. His authorship of the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) ended nearly fifty years of federal constitutional protection for abortion and remains his most consequential recent victory. Alito’s opinions and votes also played key roles this year in decisions affecting redistricting, campaign finance and executive actions.
Courtroom Demeanor and Public Pushback
Alito’s courtroom manner—grimaces, eye rolls and abrupt interjections—has become a familiar feature of oral argument. Small exchanges, such as interrupting a lawyer to pose a hypothetical and then snapping when interrupted, have drawn attention and sometimes laughter from his colleagues. Beyond the courtroom, Alito has publicly pushed back against media coverage and criticisms he views as unfair. He resurrected memories of the 2010 State of the Union moment—when he mouthed “not true” after President Barack Obama described Citizens United—while defending that and other controversial rulings.
Recent Opinions And Flashpoints
Alito has authored or led majority opinions that imposed new standards and reversed earlier precedent. In Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (2024), he wrote for the conservative majority setting a more deferential test for racial-gerrymandering claims, a marked turn from the Court’s 2017 Cooper v. Harris ruling authored by Justice Elena Kagan. In Abbott v. LULAC, Alito issued a separate opinion sharply criticizing liberal dissents that faulted the majority for overruling a lengthy trial-court finding.
He has also strongly dissented when the Court declined to support certain Trump administration actions—expressing outrage when an emergency order temporarily blocked deportations of Venezuelan detainees and authoring the lead dissent against a decision that prevented the deployment of the National Guard to Chicago.
Personal Context And Institutional Concerns
At 75, Alito is among the Court’s oldest members and has reportedly considered retirement, though he has not signaled an intention to step down. His close alignment with the political priorities of former President Donald Trump has drawn scrutiny and praise in equal measure. He has defended himself publicly—writing an op-ed to contextualize a reported trip with donor Paul Singer and responding to reporting about political flags at family properties by attributing them to his wife.
What This Means Going Forward
Alito’s combination of doctrinal influence and visible irritability creates a distinct dynamic on the Court: a justice who relentlessly pursues conservative legal changes while also engaging critics directly. As the Court considers cases on transgender rights, religious freedom, voting rules and executive authority, Alito’s views are likely to remain central to the direction of American law.
Snapshot: Alito’s record shows a willingness to overturn precedent and tighten standards for challenges to state action. But his public and private responses to criticism make him one of the bench’s most watched—and most debated—figures.
