Justice Samuel Alito dropped surprising hint in his 'frosty' rebuke of colleague: WSJ

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito dropped a surprising hint about the court's actions during the Louisiana v. Callais case in his "frosty" response to a dissent written by one of his colleagues.

The Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial board noted on Tuesday that Alito included a footnote stating that the "constitutional question" the court was asked to decide in the case had been decided on Oct.15. The editorial board appeared to find that surprising, given that the court waited about six months to release its opinion.

"He’s calling unusual attention to the fact that the Justices privately discussed and decided the constitutional issue in Louisiana v. Callais shortly after they heard the oral argument on Oct. 15, 2025," the editorial board wrote in a new editorial.

"We don’t know, but it’s a relevant question given that the later the decision was announced the more states would have passed their primary election deadlines under the unconstitutional map," it continued. "In their concurrence last week, Justices Thomas and Gorsuch said they would have preferred a much more straightforward analysis that the Voting Rights Act bans all racial gerrymanders."

"The footnote suggests some pique by Justice Alito about the Court’s long gestation on Callais, and understandably so since Justice Jackson is accusing the majority of playing politics," it added.

Alito's majority opinion included a rather terse response to the dissent filed by Justice Jackson. She argued that the court had become "unshackled" from its prior restraint and "gave way to power" in Callais.

Alito responded by calling Jackson's dissent "irresponsible."