Lauren Windsor, the filmmaker who secretly recorded conversations with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, told NPR’s Steve Inskeep she falsely identified herself as a conservative Christian and made leading statements “in service of reaching a greater truth and in service of a public good.”
In recordings uploaded to the internet on Monday, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ and Associate Justice Samuel Alito respond to questions about political polarization and the ongoing “culture war” in the United States. NPR has not heard the full version of the audio or been able to independently verify it. In the excerpt, Alito says he agrees with a statement that Windsor made about the need to “return our country to a place of godliness.”
In other excerpts that Windsor published, Chief Justice Roberts rebuffs attempts to get him to voice his opinions on the current political state of the country saying that the court’s role is simply “deciding the cases.”
Windsor told Morning Edition that in pursuit of content for her film, Gonzo for Democracy, she originally sought out Justice Clarence Thomas after a 2023 ProPublica investigation revealed lavish gifts from Republican donor Harlan Crow that Thomas had initially failed to report. When Thomas failed to appear at two Supreme Court Historical Society events, she spoke to and recorded Alito and Roberts, then posted clips from those hidden-microphone conversations online.
The Supreme Court has not responded to requests for comment about the recordings.
The ethics of secret recordings are murky
NPR’s media correspondent David Folkenflik said Windsor told him that the recordings had not been edited in any meaningful way, but she still has not released the full transcripts or unedited audio. While Windsor did not follow the journalistic standards and ethics of traditional news outlets, Folkenflik says there is some utility to what she did, but it’s hard to see the whole picture.
“I think more credibility comes when you post the full transcripts, the full audio,” Folkenflik told NPR’s Ari Shaprio.
Folkenflik added that Alito and Roberts have given similar remarks in speeches and to the media in on the record interviews.
“This is so consistent with each of the two justices' public remarks, " Folkenflik said. “And they have not taken any issue with what they've been claiming to have presented as saying - that it's hard to discount what was being presented here.”
In her brief encounter with Alito, Windsor said she claimed sympathetic views and said opponents of abortion rights would have to keep fighting. She says she didn’t inquire about his rulings, but instead told Alito “we just really need to win.”
Windsor says Alito’s agreement presented “a juxtaposition between Chief Justice Roberts, who was pretty forceful in saying that the court does not have a role,” and added, “I was definitely asking leading questions, but with the aim of really eliciting some kind of reaction from him.”
When asked about the journalistic ethics of secret recordings, Windsor said, “People concerned about ethics should be concerned about Justice Alito’s ethics and Justice Thomas’ ethics.”
The recordings may not have the intended effect
While Windsor hopes that these recordings will lead to further transparency from Supreme Court justices, Sarah Isgur, a former spokeswoman for the Justice Department under former President Donald Trump, warned that secret recordings might have the opposite effect.
“This, I fear, is going to push them even to a more cloistered life,” Isgur told NPR’s Steve Inskeep. “Because any time they try to say who they are, like Alito saying he's a Catholic who believes the country should be more godly, they're attacked for it.”
Isgur also pointed out that the questions Windsor asked are not about his Supreme Court rulings or his legal opinions — they are specifically tied to his beliefs as a Catholic.
“The questions are also asking him, as a Catholic, don't you think the country should be more godly?” Isgur said on Morning Edition. “It's his personal views. It's not about the law or the court.”
Obed Manuel edited the digital version of this story. Nina Kravinsky produced the audio version. The audio version was edited by Adam Bearne and Jan Johnson.
Transcript
MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
Democratic members of Congress say the U.S. Supreme Court is embroiled in an ethics crisis. They say conservative megadonors, along with, quote, "right-wing dark money networks," unquote, are corrupting the judicial system, and they are hosting a roundtable on Capitol Hill today to put a spotlight on the issue. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York is the vice ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Responsibility (ph). She is one of the lawmakers hosting the roundtable, and she's here with us now to tell us more. Good morning, Congresswoman. Thank you for joining us.
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Good morning. Thanks for having me.
MARTIN: So in announcing the roundtable, you and your colleague, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, who is the ranking member of your committee, cited a number of concerns, the lack of a binding ethics policy, for example, the lack of enforcement. What's your single biggest concern surrounding the Supreme Court?
OCASIO-CORTEZ: I mean, I think my single biggest concern is that there is a very clearly laid out dark money network that surrounds our court justices. And due to the complete lack of ethics enforcement around the Supreme Court, we are seeing a disturbing pattern in which the court's conduct, particularly around justices that have been receiving these, you know, largely, until now, largely unreported gifts, millions of dollars worth of gifts to, you know, in the case of Justice Clarence Thomas and the way that that is affecting their - not just their rulings and their opinions, but also their procedural decisions around the court as well. And that, in turn, is affecting our rulings on everything from Dobbs and the overturning of Roe v. Wade to environmental provisions, labor and more.
MARTIN: How do you - what's the chicken and what's the egg here? I mean, sort of the implication here is that these justices are ruling the way they are because these donors are giving them these gifts. Why couldn't it be the other way, that they're giving them these gifts because they know they're going to vote on these issues to begin with, and that's why they're friends? I mean, in the case of Clarence Thomas and some of the gifts he's received, he says this is a longtime friend of his. And they're friends for the reason a lot of people are friends - because they think the same way. So how do you know that it's the consequence of this gift-giving as opposed to the logical result?
OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I mean, I think the fact that even this - even the fact that this conversation or even the fact that that defense - that kind of defense is invoked is in and of itself a problem. Why are Supreme Court justices who are in charge of some of the most important consequential decisions facing millions of Americans receiving millions of dollars worth of gifts from undisclosed sources? And if this was a situation that was so above board, why did it go so long without documentation and flouting ethics rules?
To me, I think that the greater problem here is - and there once upon a time, and even in the lower courts has been a long-standing practice and a long-standing, frankly, ethical standard that, regardless of the causality, regardless of the chicken or the egg, the appearance, the mere appearance of bias or the mere appearance of being exposed or connected to any party in a judicial proceeding or in a court proceeding in a way is in and of itself compromising. So it really shouldn't matter whether it's - why a gift is being given. The fact that millions of dollars of undisclosed gifts are funneling directly to the conservative justices is in and of itself a crisis.
MARTIN: So there are - as now that more disclosures have been made, there are other justices, including the liberal or progressive justices who have gotten some nice things, some nice book contracts, for example, some other gifts. Is it your contention that this is mainly a Republican problem or is this a court problem?
OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I believe that writ large, you know, we believe that these ethics rules need to be changed to apply to the entire court and to all members. However, what the conservative wing of the court is engaged in, which I think is particularly concerning, is a documented pattern of receiving funds from individuals and organizations that have business before the court. In the case of Samuel Alito, he had - there was specific court proceedings before - there were cases before the court that had to do with Argentinian bonds, and there was an individual that was trying to get - Paul Singer was trying to get his case before the court not once, not twice, but on his third attempt after taking the justice on, you know, these elaborate fishing trips and private jets.
On his third attempt in getting the case before the court, it was then picked up. And in the case of Clarence Thomas as well, you have people who are receiving funds not just from friends and not just from old pals, but from people with business before the court or who are connected to amicus briefs before the court, which is an entirely different scenario. And this is not something that occurred on a one-off or...
MARTIN: OK.
OCASIO-CORTEZ: ...Even two times over decades. This is a documented pattern that continues to repeat itself.
MARTIN: Presumably, there are Republicans who are concerned about the credibility and image of the court. Are you working with any of these Republicans? And if so, why not?
OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I think where we have seen - where we have seen Republicans express concern about the courts, if we've seen them express it at all, has largely been from members of the U.S. Senate, Republican members of the U.S. Senate. And to my knowledge, you know, we have two committees where we have both Senator Durbin, who's chairing the Judiciary, and Senator Whitehouse, who are also leading investigatory proceedings on that. You know, I think it's - whether they're working more closely with their Republican colleagues, I think, is something that remains to be seen. But that is - that's the big area where we could have, I think, some bipartisan windows for ethics reform.
MARTIN: That is Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat of New York. She's the vice ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Responsibility, and she's hosting a roundtable on these issues today. Congresswoman, thank you for joining us.
OCASIO-CORTEZ: Of course. Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
300x250 Ad
300x250 Ad