Justice Samuel Alito Hospitalised After Falling Ill at Philadelphia Dinner
US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, aged 76, was hospitalised for dehydration last month after falling ill during a dinner held in his honour in Philadelphia, according to recent reports. The incident, which occurred on March 20, had not been previously disclosed by the Supreme Court's public information office.
Details of the Hospitalisation Incident
The justice became unwell while attending a dinner hosted by the Federalist Society. Alito was taken to a local hospital by his security detail, where he was evaluated and administered fluids. He was discharged that same evening and returned to his residence in Virginia with his security team.
The March 20 incident occurred during a day-long symposium at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School titled "An Examination of the Jurisprudence of Samuel Alito." The event featured a roster of Alito's former law clerks, legal scholars and attorneys who frequently practice before the high court. Though the symposium was closed to the news media, it was accessible via a public livestream. Alito was not on the official schedule and did not appear at the daytime sessions.
Supreme Court's History of Non-Disclosure
The Supreme Court's public information office has declined to comment on the matter, which had not been previously disclosed. The lack of transparency regarding the incident is consistent with the court's historical approach to the health of its members.
In June 2020, the public information office similarly declined to reveal that Chief Justice John Roberts had fallen at a Maryland country club, sustaining a head injury that required an ambulance trip to the hospital. That incident only became public knowledge after it was reported by The Washington Post.
Alito's Activities Before and After the Incident
Earlier that day, the Supreme Court had convened to hand down opinions. Alito was not on the bench that morning and was scheduled to be driven by his security detail to Philadelphia. Despite his absence from the daytime symposium, he attended the evening dinner held in his honour, where he fell ill.
The evening prior to the Philadelphia event, on March 19, Alito had attended a separate dinner in Washington, D.C. That gathering celebrated Notre Dame law professor Sherif Girgis, a former Alito clerk who was receiving the Edwin Meese Originalism Award from the Meese Institute for the Rule of Law. The award is part of Advancing American Freedom, an organisation founded by former Vice President Mike Pence.
Return to the Bench and Political Implications
In the two weeks since the hospitalisation, Alito has returned to the bench and participated in oral arguments. Court observers noted that he appeared healthy and engaged during the usual exchange with lawyers at the lectern. On Wednesday, the same day he turned 76, he was present for arguments concerning birthright citizenship.
During those proceedings, Alito expressed more receptiveness than his colleagues to the Trump administration's efforts to end the constitutional principle that anyone born in the United States is a citizen.
Alito's health and future on the bench are of significant political consequence. Appointed by George W. Bush in 2006, he has been a pivotal conservative voice on the court for two decades. He is most recognised for authoring the 2022 majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson, which overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the constitutional right to abortion. He has also been a key figure in decisions that have retrenched voting rights.
If Alito were to decide to step down, the vacancy would offer President Donald Trump a fourth opportunity to appoint a justice to the nine-member court. During his first term, Trump successfully appointed three justices, establishing a 6-3 conservative supermajority. Close friends of Alito have told CNN that the justice has contemplated the idea of retirement, but that a final decision does not seem close.
Alito remains one of the most consistent votes in favour of the administration's policies when they are challenged in litigation.
