Lauren Windsor is a left-wing activist and journalist. She attended the Supreme Court Historical Society annual dinner on June 3 and used the opportunity to do some undercover work. She posed as someone who was conservative-leaning and attempted to lead both Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts into saying things that would be grounds for embarrassment or recusing themselves.

In her targeting of Justice Alito, Windsor baited him by bringing up the country’s polarized politics, saying, “I don’t know that we can negotiate with the Left in the way that needs to happen for the polarization to end. I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”

To which Alito replied: “I think you’re probably right. On one side or the other — one side or the other is going to win. I don’t know. I mean, there can be a way of working — a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference.”

Windsor went on to say, “And that’s what I’m saying. It’s just, I think, the solution really is like winning the moral argument. Like, people in this country who believe in God got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.”

Alito replied, “I agree with you. I agree with you.”

She posted this not-so-blockbuster back and forth on her social media as proof positive that Justice Alito is a partisan judge and should not be on the Supreme Court.

EXCLUSIVE UNDERCOVER AUDIO:
Sam Alito x John Roberts x The Undercurrent 🧵

1/ Justice Alito admits lack of impartiality with the Left, says: “One side or the other is going to win.” pic.twitter.com/b5nmxToZ9z

— Lauren Windsor (@lawindsor) June 10, 2024

So, because Alito claimed (correctly) that there are deep fundamental differences between the Left’s political views and the Right’s, he is partisan? That’s simply a fact. Pro-life right-wingers think abortion is murder; pro-abortion left-wingers think it’s women’s healthcare. Leftists don’t even know what a woman is. The difference is that one side believes God is God, and the other believes each individual is his own god.

The differences politically have gotten more strident the further the Left has pushed away from the religious foundations, institutions, and beliefs on which our country was founded. It is the Left that has been hell-bent on destroying cultural and social norms in the name of “individual freedom.” It’s not freedom at all, just individual cages of vice and despair.

It’s also not really a “gotcha” moment to ask a religious person if he thinks the country should return to a place of godliness. All truly religious persons would prefer that the country return to a moral standard, not this arbitrary “you do you” laissez-faire moral relativism.

Justice Alito has been under severe attack by the raging leftists these past few weeks. The Alitos have been scrutinized for flying the American flag upside down and the “Appeal to Heaven” flag at their vacation house (you know, the one San Francisco quickly removed after that report). Martha Ann Alito, the justice’s wife, was the one who flew both flags, one as a sign of personal distress and the other because it is one of the oldest American flags.

“The feminazis believe that he should control me,” Mrs. Alito complained of left-wingers who essentially said her husband should have removed the flags or prohibited her from flying them in the first place. “So they’ll go to hell. He never controls me.”

Windsor also talked Mrs. Alito into alluding that she would get back at the media for attacking her family because of the flags. Martha Ann said she wanted to fly a “Sacred Heart of Jesus” flag because in the Catholic liturgical calendar, that’s what the month of June is, not LGBTQ “Pride Month.” That the wife of a Supreme Court justice would feel vengeful toward those attacking her family relentlessly was, of course, bombshell news to the Left.

Windsor also tried to lure John Roberts into admissions that are contrary to his position as chief justice, but he didn’t give her much to work with, either. He stated that it was not the Court’s job to put the country back on a more moral path; that was the job of elected officials. Roberts also pushed back when Windsor suggested that this was a particularly politically fraught time. He suggested that the 1960s Civil Rights and Vietnam War era was much more politically polarized.

The event at which these conversations were recorded is one that seeks to protect the justices’ privacy and celebrate the Court’s history. The executive director of the Supreme Court Historical Society, James Duff, was not at all pleased. He told the Washington Examiner: “Our policy is to ensure that all attendees, including the Justices, are treated with respect. We condemn the surreptitious recording of Justices at the event, which is inconsistent with the entire spirit of the evening. Discussion of current cases, cases decided by current sitting Justices, or a Justice’s jurisprudence is strictly prohibited and may result in forfeiture of membership in the Society.”

It is blatantly clear the Supreme Court justices are under attack — well, at least the originalists are. That includes new legislation to be introduced by Democrats Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jamie Raskin to, as AOC put it, “rein in a fundamentally unaccountable and rogue” Supreme Court.

Leftists are terrified to have Alito and Roberts’s input on several impending cases and are ramping up any and all pressure they can. These are the same leftists who are happy that “justice” was served in the case of former President Donald Trump, who was dubiously convicted in his New York trial. They only like the justice system if they can use it to persecute their enemies.