In a recent revelation, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito confirmed that he spoke with President-elect Donald Trump just hours before Trump's legal team filed a petition to delay his sentencing related to felony charges of falsifying business records. The conversation took place on Tuesday, a day before Trump's lawyers sought an urgent ruling from the Supreme Court to halt the sentencing set for January 10. Alito stated that the purpose of the call was to discuss recommendations for one of his former law clerks, William Levi, who was being considered for a government position within Trump’s incoming administration ([Newsweek](https://www.newsweek.com/justice-alito-call-trump-supreme-court-sentencing-hush-money-2012130)).

Despite Alito’s insistence that the call did not involve any discussions regarding ongoing legal matters, several political figures and advocacy groups have voiced concerns over the timing and nature of the conversation. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, criticized Alito, stating that he has "made impropriety the norm" and calling for his recusal from any cases involving Trump ([The Hill](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5076425-blumenthal-alito-trump-call/)).

Representative Jamie Raskin echoed these sentiments, emphasizing that Alito's actions were inappropriate given his role in cases that could potentially affect Trump’s presidency. Raskin described the phone call as a breach of judicial ethics, arguing that it raises questions about Alito’s impartiality ([ABC News](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/raskin-asks-alito-recuse-trump-case-after-phone/story?id=117525687)).

The Supreme Court’s deliberation comes amidst ongoing scrutiny regarding the ethical conduct of its justices, particularly during an election year marked by Trump’s controversial legal challenges. Many observers are concerned that the conversation between Alito and Trump, occurring shortly before a significant judicial decision, compromises the integrity of the highest court in the land ([The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/09/samuel-alito-trump-supreme-court)).

Trump’s legal team has argued that moving forward with sentencing could impact his responsibilities as president-elect, citing presidential immunity based on previous Supreme Court rulings. His lawyers seek to prevent the sentencing from proceeding while he appeals the conviction, asserting that it undermines national interests during a crucial transition period ([USA Today](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2025/01/09/alito-trump-supreme-court-hush-money/77574347007/)).

As the deadline approaches for the Supreme Court's decision, critics of Alito warn that the implications of this incident could have lasting effects on public trust in the judicial system. The backdrop of this controversy continues to unfold as details surface about Alito's past connections to Trump, further complicating the narrative of judicial impartiality in America.