It gets worse still.N.E. Brigand wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 11:50 pmCNN has reported that the Religious Liberty Initiative, which has submitted briefs to the Court on several matters where Alito has ruled, including this one which we discussed last year (and in which the conservatives on the Court appear to have lied about the facts of the case)* paid for him to visit Rome in 2022.
*Alito filed a concurring opinion in that case which read in full:
But in fact, and as included in Justice Sototmayor's dissent along with several other visual aids, this is a photo of the petitioner, football coach Joseph Kennedy, at a point in which Alito claims he was merely "engage[d] in private activities":The expression at issue in this case is unlike that in any of our prior cases involving the free-speech rights of public employees. Petitioner’s expression occurred while at work but during a time when a brief lull in his duties apparently gave him a few free moments to engage in private activities. When he engaged in this expression, he acted in a purely private capacity. The Court does not decide what standard applies to such expression under the Free Speech Clause but holds only that retaliation for this expression cannot be justified based on any of the standards discussed. On that understanding, I join the opinion in full.
He coached one game before he quit.