Swamp Creatures: Justice Alito recuses over $15K in unrelated stock holdings, while Louisiana judge Receives $18K from trial lawyers who won $745 million verdict

In the murky bayous of Louisiana’s legal system—where the water is deep, the alligators are fat, and conflicts of interest lurk just below the surface—one set of rules seems to apply to the pristine marble halls of the U.S. Supreme Court, and an entirely different set governs the parish courthouses back in the swamp.

Today, as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Chevron v. Plaquemines, Justice Samuel Alito was notably absent. He recused himself because he owns roughly $15,000 in stock in ConocoPhillips—a company that isn’t even a party to the cert petition before the Court. A minor financial tie to a tangential player, and Alito stepped aside to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

Meanwhile, down in Plaquemines Parish, the state district judge who presided over trial in the underlying case, which ended with a staggering $745 million verdict against Chevron, has pocketed more than $18,000 in campaign contributions from the very trial lawyers driving these coastal erosion lawsuits.

The irony rises like swamp gas.

Louisiana campaign finance records show that the Baton Rouge-based firm Talbot, Carmouche & Marcello—lead counsel on the Plaquemines case—and its partners donated $5,000 to Judge Michael Clement across four payments on March 24, 2014.

In the same week, two other firms allied with Carmouche on the case piled on: Connick & Connick gave $500 on March 20, while Cossich, Sumich, Parsiola & Taylor funneled $5,000 through the firm and a real estate company owned by one of its partners and shares the same address. The 2014 gifts came in addition to $7,500 in contributions the Cossich firm had already steered to Clement in 2011 and 2012.

Total investment by the plaintiffs’ legal team in the judge who would later oversee their blockbuster trial: $18,000.

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-24756CONTRIBCOSSICH SUMICH PARSIOLA & TAYLOR
8397 Highway 23
Suite 100
Belle Chasse, LA 70037 3/25/2011 $2,500.00

Clement, MichaelF102 : 10G  - LA-27766CONTRIBBENJAMIN PROPERTIES LLC
8397 Highway 23
Suite 100
Belle Chasse, LA 70037 10/13/2011 $2,500.00

Clement, Michael
F102 : ANN  - LA-37851CONTRIBCOSSICH SUMICH PARISOLA & TAYLOR LLC
8397 Highway 23
Suite 100
Belle Chasse, LA 70037 10/31/2012 $2,500.00

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBCONNICK AND CONNICK LLC
2551 Metairie Road
Metairie, LA 70001 3/20/2014 $500.00

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBCOSSICH SUMICH PARISOLA & TAYLOR LLC
8397 Highway 23
Suite 100
Belle Chasse, LA 70037 3/21/2014 $2,500.00

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBBENJAMIN PROPERTIES LLC
8397 Highway 23
Suite 100
Belle Chasse, LA 70037 3/21/2014 $2,500.00

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBDONALD T. CARMOUCHE ATTORNEY LLC
17405 Perkins Road
Baton Rouge, LA 70810 3/24/2014 $833.33

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBJOHN H. CARMOUCHE ATTORNEY LLC
17405 Perkins Road
Baton Rouge, LA 70810 3/24/2014 $833.33

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBTALBOT CARMOUCHE & MARCELLO
17405 Perkins Road
Baton Rouge, LA 70810 3/24/2014 $2,500.00

Clement, MichaelF102 : 30P  - LA-43929CONTRIBUTOR L. MARCELLO ATTORNEY LLC
PO Box 759
Gonzales, LA 70707 3/24/2014 $833.34

Given that plaintiffs lawyers gave $18,000 in direct contributions to the district court judge that oversaw their case in Plaquemines turn, how could the state then turn around and argue with a straight face that Justice Alito's minimal holdings in unrelated stock—tied to a company that's defendants in name only— should serve as grounds for his recusal? As absurd as that may sound, that's exactly what the timeline suggests happened here.

Timeline of Key Events Leading Up to Justice Alito’s Recusal

April 29 2025                                                                                                                                                                                                      

Gov. Landry suggests Conoco has settled in an interview with WWL TV. After jury’s $745M decision, debate grows over how far to take Big Oil lawsuits | wwltv.com  LANDRY: “From my time as Attorney General to now as Governor, I have worked to reduce the number of coastal lawsuits in this State. And we have," he said. "I also have continued to work to find a resolution rather than litigate. The fact of the matter is, Chevron chose to litigate and a jury in Plaquemines Parish found them liable." The governor continued: "I believe seeking a resolution is always the best approach. Other major companies like Shell, BP and Conoco have all sought a resolution rather than trying to litigate these issues. I appreciate that. There is no one who has stood beside President Trump and his energy polices more than me. No one besides myself and AG Murrill have defended these energy companies more than us. We are trying to protect our Coast!”

May 07 2025                                  

Letter dated May 7, 2025 informing the US Supreme Court that  ConocoPhillips' subsidiary, Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Company, is withdrawing from the petition for certiorari filed.

Jun 02 2025                                               

The Court dismisses Burlington Resources Oil & Gas as a petitioner in case under Rule 46.1 after Burlington advised the Court that it was “withdrawing” from the petition and that “neither Burlington Resources nor ConocoPhillips will be a party to (or have any other involvement in)" the case.

Jun 16 2025    

The Court grants Chevron’s cert petition.

Aug 13 2025                           

Justice Alito's files his 2024 financial disclosure report, which shows that the previous year's investments included minimal holdings in Conoco worth an estimated $15,000. 

Nov. 13 2025                                                                     

Louisiana’s brief includes an odd footnote: “Among those defendants is a ConocoPhillips subsidiary. Pet.ii, iii. Although the ConocoPhillips subsidiary withdrew from the petition for writ of certiorari without explanation, see 5/9/25 Letter, the subsidiary remains a defendant and would equally benefit from any ruling in petitioners’ favor.”

Jan 08 2026                                           

 Letter from Clerk of Court to counsel of record noting that Justice Alito will not continue to participate in this case because of a "financial interest in ConocoPhillips, the parent corporation for Burlington Resources Oil and Gas Company."

Adding another layer of intrigue to this already curious case: Louisiana’s Solicitor General, Ben Aguiñaga,—who argued the state’s position before the Supreme Court—was once a law clerk to none other than Justice Alito.

The case was heard before the remaining eight justices January 12. Audio from the oral arguments is available here. A decision is expected by the end of the Court’s term in June. Should the justices split 4–4, the Fifth Circuit’s ruling stands, keeping these lawsuits in swampland otherwise known as Louisiana state court—where the water is murky, the predators keep feeding, and impartiality appears to be strictly optional.