In A Year Of High-Stakes SCOTUS Decisions, Justice Alito Steals The Show 90%

By Shawn Fleetwood68%

7/8/2026, 11:44:43 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 79.3% saturation with 547 hits. Analysis detected 2,724 faulty-reasoning hits from 690 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 83.4% and a BS Rank of 90% (2,235 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 89.80% of the article peer group.

It’s clear that Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway found someone worth writing a book about when she began digging into the life and career of Justice Samuel Alito. 
And following the conclusion of yet another pivotal Supreme Court term, others are finally starting to appreciate just how instrumental the Bush appointee is to many of the court’s consequential decisions. 
Throughout the past year, Alito has been at the forefront of producing well-crafted originalist opinions in several high-stakes cases before the bench. 
Much like his past work, these writings have been key to advancing sound legal interpretation and upholding Americans’ constitutional rights. 
The justice kicked off his stellar term by authoring the majority opinion in *Louisiana v. 
Callais*, in which the court smacked down states’ ability to use race in the redistricting process. 
Not only did he cogently explain how the Voting Rights Act had been abused to browbeat states to partake in race-based redistricting, but he also explained how such a practice violates America’s colorblind Constitution. 
“Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965  was designed to enforce the Constitution  not collide with it. 
Unfortunately, lower courts have sometimes applied this Court’s §2 precedents in a way that forces States to engage in the very race-based discrimination that the Constitution forbids, 
Alito wrote. 
[READ: Alito Torches Jackson’s ‘Trivial’ And ‘Insulting’ Hot Take On Supreme Court’s Latest *Callais* Order] 
Alito continued this hot streak into the waning weeks of the court’s 2025-2026 term. 
On the immigration front, he penned the majority opinion in *Mullin v. 
Al Otro Lado*, in which the court affirmed that asylum seekers do not “arrive” in the United States while still standing in Mexico. 
He also authored the majority decision in a pair of cases (*Mullin v. 
Doe* and *Trump v. 
Miot*) upholding President Trump’s revocation of Temporary Protected Status for groups of foreign nationals residing in America under the TPS program. 
Alito's ability to hold a majority together was similarly apparent in *Wolford v. 
Lopez*. 
Finding Hawaii’s concealed carry restrictions to be unconstitutional, the Bush appointee provided a solid defense of Americans’ Second Amendment freedoms and their right to carry firearms for their protection. 
“This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives, 
Alito wrote. 
[READ: 5 Killer Quotes From Alito’s Takedown Of Hawaii’s Illegal Gun Control Law] 
Alito's penchant for writing clear and concise opinions that adhere to the Constitution isn't exclusive to majority decisions, either. 
Even when on the losing side, he makes his case in a way that keeps the original meaning of the law at the forefront. 
This was particularly evident in the Bush appointee's dissenting opinion in *Trump v. 
Barbara*, in which the court shoehorned so-called "birthplace citizenship" into the 14th Amendment. 
He chastised the majority for making a "serious mistake" in conjuring up such a "right" and forewarned about the "grotesque results" its erroneous constitutional interpretation will produce. 
Alito also penned the principal dissent in a decision (*Watson v. 
RNC*) upholding states’ ability to accept mail-in ballots after Election Day. 
The justice highlighted how state statutes that permit such a practice conflict with existing federal law specifying an election day. 
He further ripped the majority for generating a ruling that is "inconsistent" with the law and "creates a serious risk of further undermining public confidence in our elections and our system of self-government." 
Taken collectively, these opinions are but a microcosm of the terrific work Alito has been producing in his 20 years on the Supreme Court. 
From writing the decision overturning *Roe v. 
Wade* to upholding religious liberty, the list is seemingly endless. 
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas often receive much praise and adulation for their originalist work on the bench  and deservedly so. 
But it's Alito who has been right there with them, quietly helping move the nation's highest court (and the law) in a better direction. 
With incredible SCOTUS terms such as this one, it's past time he receives the long overdue recognition that he deserves. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.3%Shawn Fleetwood: 6.7%The Federalist: 8.5%Confirmation Bias10.3%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.4%Shawn Fleetwood: 3.3%The Federalist: 3.5%Availability Heuristic1.4%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.1%The Federalist: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.6%The Federalist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.9%The Federalist: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias3.2%This article: 1.7%Shawn Fleetwood: 11.9%The Federalist: 10.1%Framing Effect1.7%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 7.5%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.6%Status Quo Bias7.5%This article: 3.5%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect3.5%This article: 8.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.7%The Federalist: 1.0%Optimism Bias8.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.2%The Federalist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 36.8%Shawn Fleetwood: 10.1%The Federalist: 12.4%Negativity Bias36.8%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.6%The Federalist: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.6%The Federalist: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Shawn Fleetwood: 2.5%The Federalist: 3.9%In-Group Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.9%The Federalist: 2.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 45.5%Shawn Fleetwood: 5.7%The Federalist: 2.2%Halo Effect45.5%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 14.8%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.6%The Federalist: 1.3%Recency Bias14.8%This article: 7.4%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.6%Primacy Effect7.4%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 9.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 3.6%The Federalist: 5.3%Ad Hominem9.0%This article: 1.9%Shawn Fleetwood: 2.1%The Federalist: 2.7%Straw Man1.9%This article: 14.3%Shawn Fleetwood: 4.5%The Federalist: 5.0%Appeal to Authority14.3%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.4%The Federalist: 2.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.5%The Federalist: 2.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.4%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 28.1%Shawn Fleetwood: 8.3%The Federalist: 11.4%Hasty Generalization28.1%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.5%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.5%Bandwagon4.5%This article: 39.3%Shawn Fleetwood: 8.7%The Federalist: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion39.3%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 3.1%The Federalist: 3.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.5%The Federalist: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.4%The Federalist: 0.5%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.9%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.5%The Federalist: 1.1%Burden of Proof2.9%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 6.4%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.3%The Federalist: 0.4%Composition/Division6.4%This article: 3.2%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.3%The Federalist: 2.8%Anecdotal3.2%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 13.2%Shawn Fleetwood: 1.4%The Federalist: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)13.2%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.8%The Federalist: 0.8%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.3%Shawn Fleetwood: 2.9%The Federalist: 3.1%Unattributed Quote14.3%This article: 6.5%Shawn Fleetwood: 2.1%The Federalist: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection6.5%This article: 79.3%Shawn Fleetwood: 18.3%The Federalist: 19.7%Biased Writer Voice79.3%This article: 2.9%Shawn Fleetwood: 2.2%The Federalist: 5.2%Indoctrination2.9%This article: 0.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 18.0%Shawn Fleetwood: 19.0%The Federalist: 15.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias18.0%This article: 4.1%Shawn Fleetwood: 0.5%The Federalist: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.1%

690 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker0.6%attributed speech686writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageJustice Samuel Alito • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageJustice Samuel Alito • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Justice Samuel Alito

0%flagged-word coverage
4 attributed words100% of attributed speech95% writer coverage
0%40.0%80.0%Biased Writer Voice-79.7 ptsWriter: 79.7%Justice Samuel Alito: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -18.1 ptsWriter: 18.1%Justice Samuel Alito: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-14.4 ptsWriter: 14.4%Justice Samuel Alito: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-6.6 ptsWriter: 6.6%Justice Samuel Alito: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -4.1 ptsWriter: 4.1%Justice Samuel Alito: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-2.9 ptsWriter: 2.9%Justice Samuel Alito: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.