Talk:Samuel Alito

message: Are you saying that members of the US Supreme Court cannot be impeached or only that Alito's statement to that effect should not be labeled as controversial?  
The Wikipedia article on "List of impeachment investigations of United States federal judges" says, "As of December 2019, there have been 66 federal judges or Supreme Court Justices investigated for impeachment."  In 1969 Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas resigned under allegations similar to those currently against Alito.  The Wikipedia article on Fortas says that then US President "Nixon was unsure if an investigation or prosecution was legal, but was convinced by then-Assistant Attorney General and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist that it would be." In 1970 then-House Minority Leader and future President Gerald R. Ford tried to initiate similar proceedings against Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.  In 1841 US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase was officially impeached by the US House but acquitted in the Senate the following year.   
In my judgment, it's POV editing to cite without rebuttal Alito's claim that "No provision in the Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period." The Wikipedia article on "Wikipedia:POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields" says, "Having a strong POV is fine and you can report it from a source, but also other POVs may be reported from sourcing." That's particularly true for anything as controversial as Alito's denial of the authority of the US Congress to regulate the Supreme Court.  
Accordingly, I'm reverting your edit.  Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia:Prime objective to create "a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge." DavidMCEddy (talk) 16:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @DavidMCEddy  — Ironically, you have it backwards. In this case, it's actually POV editing to input rebuttals to every one of Alito's claims, per WP:UNDUE. The constitutional aspect of whether or not Congress has the authority to regulate the Supreme Court is open to debate, and were focusing on Alito's espousals on the subject, so WP:ASPECT applies. By the way, none of the first paragraph you wrote in Ethical Questions has any of this kind of "" on his view. I removed the sentence also because it made the lackluster mistake of directly citing Wikipedia articles as a source, which is prohibited per WP:CIRCULAR. GuardianH (talk) 19:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethical questions 

message: The opening sentence of the 'Personal life' section is odd. Is says the subject married "Martha-Ann Alito", which makes it sound like he married his cousin. It should read he read "the former Martha-Ann Bomgardner", or "Martha-Ann Alito (nee Bomgardner)". --164.64.118.102 (talk) 17:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong name for wife 

message: The last paragraphs of two sections are on the same topic and cover the same info. The last paragraph in the 'Ethical issues' section and the 'Personal life' section are basically the same and therefore redundant. --164.64.118.102 (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated sections on flag 

message: Plan B is levonorgestrel. Its ingredient is not mifepristone as stated in the article. 69.115.90.113 (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed reference to Plan B for reason stated. Random fixer upper (talk) 19:31, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of drug in Plan B is inaccurate  

message: Added text/ref (5/29/2024) to main article - then reverted - seemed relevant - Worth considering adding after all - or Not? - Comments Welcome from other editors - in any case - Stay Safe amd Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 10:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add [[NYT]] article re [[Judicial disqualification|Recusal of Judges]] - or Not? 

message: It is very unlikely that Justice Alito is a military veteran.  Serving in the reserve component does not confer veteran status unless that person is deployed to foreign soil or activated for a national emergency.  Typically, reservists are not veterans and do not enjoy veteran benefits. 184.74.29.158 (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military veteran