Summary

Justice Samuel Alito, a self-described Originalist, has been criticized for allegedly disregarding the Constitution’s text when it conflicts with his personal views.

Recently, it emerged that Alito accepted a knighthood from a European order, despite the Constitution’s ban on foreign titles for U.S. officials.

This title, from the House of Bourbon–Two Sicilies, raises questions about Alito’s commitment to American democratic ideals, which the Framers aimed to protect from foreign influence.

Critics argue that Alito’s actions reflect hypocrisy in his supposed adherence to Originalism and constitutional principles.

  • diffusive@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 days ago

    For a bit of context: the house of Bourbon - Two sicilies has no land for 150 years. They used to rule the south of Italy but after the Italian “unification” (or conquest) they got kicked out and have no real power.

    While this may still be a conflict of interest since I am pretty sure they are still filthy rich and they may have economic interests in the US. But there is no foreign power interference here since there is no foreign power 🙂

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

      By the strict wording it’s a violation because they absolutely style themselves as princes to a throne in exile.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        Do they need to be recognized by the US as a foreign prince for it to count?

        If not, could Will Smith “The Fresh Prince” grant a disqualifying title?

      • NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        Interesting issue. Does their belief in their right to power control? There’s that crazy lady in Canada who calls herself the queen of Canada and issues edicts and whatever every now and then (somehow connected to qanon, I don’t remember the details). Could a US official accept a “title” bestowed by her, since she claims nobility and authority?

        My recollection on the emoluments issue was SCOTUS punted in the same way they did with respect to Trump’s ability to run for office after the insurrection - Congress must declare the violation, and the remedy is presumably impeachment. So the practical effect is zero, since Congress would never take this up, let alone impeach and remove. I’d love if Dems did though, it would be fun seeing Republicans defend their justice receiving nighthood from some weird ass secret society thing.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          That would be an issue for a court but it would be really hard to make the case that actual nobles bestowing actual titles in actual knight orders isn’t a violation.

          It would be an impeachment regardless because the remedy is to fire them and that’s how you fire a SCOTUS judge.