Increasing numbers of Americans are deeply opposed to building more data centers. Over the summer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) imposed the strictest data center rules in the country, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) ordered a statewide moratorium on hyperscale construction, and Gov. Greg Abbott (R) paused new approvals in Texas pending a grid audit.

At the local level, dozens of county and municipal fights have followed no reliable partisan pattern. Polling from Heatmap and Embold, collected by anonymous Substack writer Cremieux, shows data center popularity plummeting over the last year.

Any actions seen as forcing data centers on voters who do not want them will only make matters worse.

Though Cremieux argues the opposition is fundamentally driven by NIMBYism (not in my back yard), I am unconvinced. The polling seems to follow the pattern you would expect if NIMBYism were the primary driver, but posing the problem as a generic national issue produces substantially less opposition.

The arguments most central to the anti-data-center cause, namely complaints about the effect on utility costs, seem to generate an outsized amount of discourse relative to their actual effect. For example, in Virginia — the world’s data center capital and the state where I live — the State Corporation Commission estimated that shifting capacity and distribution costs from households to the large-load rate class would lower a typical residential bill by about 3.4%, or roughly $5.52 a month.

In other words, the effect is something on the order of a Subway sandwich in 2008.

I want to be scrupulous, because the complaints about data centers are often not literally false. Households are indeed suffering from a pecuniary externality created by increased demand. But it is hard to reconcile the mostly muted effects with the surging level of emotional response.

Americans’ growing dislike of data centers stems not from animus toward any single company or product but from a cumulative reaction to the momentous technological changes of the past couple of decades.

Because AI is the latest harbinger of those changes — and offers revolutionary potential — it has inherited our culture’s immune response. This means these problems cannot be adjudicated simply by changing utility regulations or even bribing local communities.

RELATED: The dirty secret behind Big Tech’s data center boom

Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group/Getty Images

Three further factors have combined with the populist anti-tech feeling to make AI and, by extension, data centers unusually unpopular.

First, AI faces a particularly unfavorable coalition of constituencies. Its association with California and the tech industry has deeply soured much of conservative America toward it, and its association with billionaires and big business has soured many progressives. Even many techies feel personally threatened by the technology.

Second, those most aggressively advocating for data centers are not building them in their own back yards. Palo Alto, where I lived while attending grad school, has spent years fighting small-cell installations. One of the most prestigious retirement homes in the U.S., Channing House, recently fought to have wireless equipment removed from its roof.

In January, the city of Palo Alto wrote to the FCC opposing a rule that would speed up wireless approvals, while at the same time supporting the infrastructure needed to run AI-enabled services, so long as it retains the power to veto unwanted projects.

When the group that appears to benefit most from a technology is also most averse to its consequences, it is natural for the public to wonder what the tech world might be hiding. The anonymous author Polimath, writing in Marginally Compelling, gets closer to the underlying problem by viewing it as another front in the culture war, an outworking of long-simmering discontent with tech culture.

Third, much of the tech world itself seems increasingly concerned about the existential risk AI might pose to humanity. For example, earlier this month, Jacob Coxon, a researcher who spent three years doing pretraining work at OpenAI and then Anthropic, publicly resigned, writing that both companies were racing toward self-improving superintelligence and “gambling with our lives.”

RELATED: America doesn’t need Dario Amodei’s permission to build

Jason Henry/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Evan Hubinger, an alignment lead at Anthropic, replied that he agreed and put the odds of AI killing everyone within the decade above 10%. From talking to my friends at these labs, the modal person really does seem to think they are summoning the machine god. That prospect naturally feeds public opposition to AI.

Taken together, these factors help explain the public’s anger. The lines of the current debate have already hardened, and the grievances far predate the specific events of the day. Any actions seen as forcing data centers on voters who do not want them will only make matters worse.

But the centers will be built regardless. Demand is so enormous, and suitable locations are sufficiently plentiful, that only a small number of permissive communities, such as Loudoun County, are needed. If localities want to opt out, I see little reason to stop them.

However, the industry could take an important step if it wants to win broad American support.

Specifically, Big Tech should make a visible effort to build data centers near the communities where its executives and employees live. This would give them a way to begin convincing Americans that data centers are an asset worth having, not a liability worth dodging.

Concerns about water and electricity are simply not what most people are worried about, and addressing them will do nothing to solve the larger problem. Since these reasons are selected ex post to justify pre-existing opposition, defeating any single point will merely invite a hundred more.

If you are opposed to data centers, my guess is that saving $5 on your monthly utility bill wouldn’t be enough to change your opinion.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the American Mind.

​Ai, Americans, Big tech, Data centers, Fcc, Superintelligence, Virginia, Polling, Nimby, Culture war, Openai, Anthropic, Opinion & analysis 

A man who founded an LGBTQ+ therapy practice was arrested after he was accused of sexually assaulting two of his patients.

Joseph LoGiudice founded the “Liberation Psychotherapy” practice and acted as a clinical director when the assaults occurred, according to a press release from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

‘While expressly described as an LGBTQ-centered practice, we allege that LoGiudice abused the trust placed in him as a therapist to sexually assault members of the LGBTQ community he serves.’

One of those who accused LoGiudice did so after hearing about a separate indictment against Remington Yhap, another worker at Liberation Psychotherapy who specialized in LGBTQ+ mental health.

Yhap was arrested for allegedly raping a teenage patient he had been providing therapy to for many months.

“Liberation Psychotherapy’s clinical director, Joseph LoGiudice, allegedly sexually assaulted two patients in his care at the very practice he founded,” said Bragg in a statement with the press release.

LoGiudice had run the clinic’s Gay Men’s Therapy Group and is a licensed clinical social worker.

One victim was assaulted by LoGiudice in Nov. 2022 after engaging in “sexual misconduct” with the patient twice.

A second victim was assaulted by LoGiudice in Jan. 2024 after a group therapy session and again in Jan. 2026 during a private therapy session, according to Bragg.

“While expressly described as an LGBTQ-centered practice, we allege that LoGiudice abused the trust placed in him as a therapist to sexually assault members of the LGBTQ community he serves. This investigation is ongoing.

LoGiudice is facing a total of 24 counts related to the alleged abuse, which includes 10 counts of third-degree criminal sex acts, 13 counts of third-degree sexual abuse, and one count of third-degree rape.

RELATED: Officials of ‘Latinx’ LGBTQ+ center outraged that months-long fecal attacks are not arrestable

Bragg asked for any other possible victims to contact his office.

A profile at Huffington Post said LoGiudice had published a book titled “Our Naked Lives: Essays from Gay Italian-American Men” in 2013. He wrote an article claiming that capitalism had destroyed people emotionally and psychologically.

He was also married to Michael Carosone, who was also a therapist at Liberation Psychotherapy, according to posts online objecting to anti-Semitic statements he allegedly made.

“His interests and passion are in understanding and advocating for individuals who are marginalized, vulnerable, and stigmatized, particularly LGBTQ individuals with disabilities, while utilizing perspectives from disability studies and intersectionality,” read a line from the profile.

His profile at his website has been scrubbed from the internet but can still be viewed at the Wayback Machine internet archive. His website has also been scrubbed.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Capitalism, Lgbtq, Sexual assault, Rape, Lgbtq agenda, Crime 

One of the first things I did when we moved into our semi-furnished rental last year was place a 12-inch concrete statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary — one of the few possessions I’d recovered from the ashes of our house in the Palisades — by the front door.

I thought the place needed a brazenly Catholic touch to counteract the tasteful Westside L.A. “spirituality” already on display: the Native American kitsch, the Henry Miller quote in the powder room, the reclining Buddha in the garden by the front door.

The closer Francis drew to Christ, the more intensely Catholic he became.

Never mind that next to the Buddha the owner had already put one of the Church’s most famous saints: a tonsured St. Francis of Assisi, cradling a dove in his hands, rabbits gathered around the birdbath at his feet.

That Francis was even welcome at such an ecumenical gathering seemed to confirm my general impression of him as a kind of generic Christian Zen master. The statue looked like a glorified garden gnome to me.

Without even realizing it, I’d bought into modernity’s slow domestication of one of the most radical Christians who ever lived.

Sainthood without sanctity

G.K. Chesterton noticed the problem more than a century ago. Modern admirers, he wrote, had learned to “appreciate the saint almost without the sanctity.”

Francis did not grow up poor. He was born in Assisi in 1181 or 1182, the son of a prosperous cloth merchant. As a young man, he enjoyed fine clothes, spent money freely, and dreamed not of feeding sparrows but of military glory.

Around the age of 20, he went to war against neighboring Perugia, was captured after Assisi’s defeat, and spent months as a prisoner. Illness followed. Another attempt at a military career ended with Francis turning back before he had really begun it.

His conversion came slowly, through humiliation, failure, illness, and prayer.

Look at one of those garden statues of Francis, surrounded by birds and rabbits, and it’s easy to imagine sharing at least a little in his saintliness. I like animals. I can be nice to a bird.

But Francis learned to love God’s creation from the bottom up, beginning with nature at its most capriciously cruel and monstrous: leprosy.

Sweetness of soul and body

The disease could horribly disfigure the human body, and in Francis’s world, its sufferers lived largely apart from everyone else. Francis, like everyone else, was repulsed by them.

Thomas of Celano, his earliest biographer, says that Francis once found even the sight of leper houses unbearable. If he spotted one from two miles away, he would cover his nose with his hands.

Then, Celano writes, Francis encountered a leper and did what would previously have been unthinkable: He approached the man and kissed him.

Francis’ own account is less dramatic but probably more revealing. “The Lord himself led me among them,” he wrote near the end of his life. He began showing them mercy, and what had once seemed bitter became “sweetness of soul and body.”

Celano tells us what that mercy looked like. Francis went to live among lepers, washing them and cleaning the pus from their sores.

To repair the Church

According to Franciscan tradition, Francis was later praying before a crucifix in the crumbling church of San Damiano outside Assisi when he heard Christ tell him to repair His church. Francis, quite reasonably, took this literally, rebuilding San Damiano and helping restore other dilapidated churches around Assisi. Only later would the command acquire its more famous second meaning. Francis would spend the rest of his life repairing the Church in a rather more ambitious sense.

His new life brought him into increasingly bitter conflict with his father. Pietro Bernardone had spent years building a prosperous business and raising a son who now seemed determined to give the proceeds away. The dispute culminated in dramatic fashion. Standing before the bishop of Assisi, Francis surrendered his claim to his father’s property and stripped off the clothes his father had provided him. The bishop covered the naked young man with his cloak.

The movement that formed around Francis eventually became the Order of Friars Minor. Its members worked, prayed, preached, cared for the sick, and lived without the ordinary security provided by possessions. Francis himself insisted on manual labor. “I worked with my hands, and I still desire to work,” he recalled near the end of his life.

Chesterton put the intensity of his asceticism more colorfully: “He devoured fasting as a man devours food.”

The peace of Christ

None of this means the familiar Francis of birds and flowers is a fraud. Francis really did possess an extraordinary love for creation. His “Canticle of the Creatures” praises God through Brother Sun, Sister Moon, wind, water, fire, and “our Sister Mother Earth.” The poem later supplied the title of Pope Francis’ 2015 encyclical Laudato si’.

But Brother Sun and Sister Moon did not emerge from a pleasant afternoon spent admiring the Umbrian countryside. Francis composed the first part of the “Canticle” near the end of his life, sick and suffering at San Damiano.

When Jorge Mario Bergoglio was elected pope in 2013, his friend Cardinal Claudio Hummes embraced him and said, “Don’t forget the poor!” Bergoglio later recalled that he immediately thought of Francis of Assisi — the man of poverty, peace, and creation. He became the first pope to take the name Francis.

Visiting Assisi later that year, he addressed the Francis most of us think we know.

“Franciscan peace is not something saccharine,” the pope said. Nor, he added, was it “a kind of pantheistic harmony with forces of the cosmos.”

Behind enemy lines

Pope Francis’ contention that “the peace of Saint Francis is the peace of Christ” helps illuminate one of the most striking episodes of Francis’ life.

In 1219, while Christian and Muslim armies were fighting the Fifth Crusade in Egypt, Francis crossed the battle lines near Damietta and entered the camp of Sultan al-Malik al-Kamil.

An eyewitness account helps us understand how extraordinary this was. Jacques de Vitry, bishop of Acre, wrote the following year that this unarmed friar had walked into enemy territory in the middle of a war and preached to the Muslims for several days. The sultan eventually had him returned safely to the Christian lines.

What Francis and al-Kamil said to each other is harder to know. Later accounts supplied increasingly elaborate details, including Francis offering to undergo an ordeal by fire.

But we do know what Francis thought friars should do among Muslims, because he wrote it down. They could live among non-Christians “without quarrels or disputes,” he instructed, acknowledging themselves as Christians. Or when they believed it pleased God, they could explicitly proclaim the Christian faith. Francis had walked unarmed across a battlefield to do exactly that.

Closing the gap

Francis’ quieter contributions to Christianity proved just as enduring. In 1223, at Greccio, Francis arranged a manger with hay, an ox, and a donkey so worshipers could contemplate the conditions in which Christ had been born. A priest celebrated Mass over the manger. While there were no statues playing Mary, Joseph, or the infant Jesus, the celebration nevertheless became the ancestor of the Christmas crèche now found in homes and churches around the world.

Greccio also tells us something about the peculiar intensity of Francis’ mysticism. Again and again, he seemed determined to collapse the distance between himself and the physical life of Christ. At Greccio, he wanted people to encounter Bethlehem almost as if they had been there: the hay, the animals, the feeding trough, the poverty into which Christ had been born.

A year later, at La Verna, that identification with Christ became more mysterious — and, if the Franciscan accounts are true, physical. During a mountain retreat, Francis experienced a vision of the crucified Christ and received wounds corresponding to the wounds of the crucifixion — the stigmata. The claim did not first surface centuries later. Brother Elias announced the wounds in a letter sent after Francis’ death, and Thomas of Celano described them in the biography he wrote for Francis’ canonization.

Francis himself left no account of receiving them.

RELATED: Pope Leo XIV: The right leader for a church in crisis

Mondadori Portfolio/Getty Images

Brother Fire

By then, his body was falling apart. Francis was losing his sight to a painful disease of the eyes. Doctors tried plasters and eye washes. They opened his veins to bleed him. His condition only grew worse. Finally, a physician proposed something more drastic: burning the flesh around his failing eye with a red-hot iron.

When the doctor placed the instrument in the fire, the man who had written of Brother Sun and Sister Moon extended his friendship to the very element about to cause him terrible pain.

“My Brother Fire,” Francis addressed it, asking it to “be courtly to me in this hour.”

The hot iron was drawn across his face from his ear toward his eyebrow. It didn’t work. Near death, according to Thomas of Celano, Francis asked his brothers to lay him naked on the bare ground so he could greet yet another member of his family of creation: “our Sister Bodily Death.” On the evening of October 3, 1226, at the Portiuncula, she arrived. Francis was probably 44 or 45 years old. Two years later, Pope Gregory IX declared him a saint.

Today, October 3, marks exactly 800 years since Francis’ death. Few Catholic saints have traveled as far outside Catholicism as Francis. Environmentalists claim his love of creation. Peace activists invoke his encounter with the sultan. Protestants have found plenty to admire too. Christianity Today has included him among its “131 Christians Everyone Should Know.” One evangelical writer simply called him “our Francis, too.”

And of course, he turns up beside Buddhas in Los Angeles gardens.

Catholic to the core

But the Church is observing his 800th anniversary in unmistakably Catholic fashion. At the direction of Pope Leo XIV, a special Jubilee Year of St. Francis began January 10 and continues through January 10, 2027. The Apostolic Penitentiary is offering Catholics a plenary indulgence for pilgrimages to designated Franciscan churches and other places connected to Francis, accompanied by the prescribed prayers and observances and the usual conditions of confession, Communion, and prayer for the pope’s intentions.

A plenary indulgence is not the first thing that comes to mind when most people look at the little friar holding the bird. But neither, probably, is Francis’ “Testament.”

Francis dictated the document near the end of his life, partly to make sure the movement he was leaving behind remained recognizably Catholic. There he writes of his reverence for priests “according to the manner of the holy Roman Church.” He says he sees in this world nothing bodily of Christ except the Eucharist, which he wants “honored above all things.” He recalls that when God first gave him brothers, he wrote down their way of life and “the Lord Pope confirmed it for me.”

The “Testament” ends by telling his friars to keep it alongside their Rule and read the two together, so that they might observe the Rule “in a more Catholic manner.”

You don’t need a specific creed to admire Francis, or even to follow him for quite a distance. But follow Francis far enough, and you eventually find yourself at the threshold of the Church and all it contains: the Eucharist, priests, confession, obedience, the pope.

At the same time, his example strips away centuries of polemic and invites us to see the Church more clearly. Here was a man almost comically ill-suited to the idea that Christianity is fundamentally about clericalism, bureaucracy, or institutional power. He owned nothing. He wasn’t a priest. He preached to lepers and Muslims, slept on the ground, rebuilt ruined churches with his hands, and founded a movement whose very name emphasized the littleness of its members.

And yet the closer he drew to Christ, the more intensely Catholic he became.

Chesterton saw in that relationship something of the mystery of the Church itself: a human institution that somehow provides a path to the divine. “The casket that was locked in Palestine can be unlocked in Umbria,” he wrote, “for the Church is the keeper of the keys.”

​Blessed virgin mary, Catholic saints, Eucharist, Gk chesterton, Pope francis, Pope gregory ix, Sacramental confession, St francis, St francis of assisi, Sultan almalik alkamil, Stigmata, Catholicism, Christianity, Culture, Lifestyle, Pope leo xiv, Faith 

Walt Disney Animation Studios’ upcoming fantasy-comedy “Hexed” — which follows teenage witch Billie Doe as she discovers her magical powers and leaves behind normal life to join the world of witches — is set to hit theaters this November.

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey already has major concerns about the film, starting with the premise.

“It’s presenting witchcraft and being a witch not as a bad thing — not as like the evil witch from ‘Snow White’ — but actually possibly as a good thing, as a neutral thing, or even as a superpower,” she says.

On this episode of “Relatable,” Allie is joined by Jenn Nizza, a former psychic medium who left the New Age after converting to Christianity, to explore how witchcraft and occultism have seeped their way into mainstream culture, including the areas that most impact children.

While movies like “Hexed” and “K-Pop Demon Hunters,” among others, deliberately lean into open witchcraft and demonic themes, other kid films and forms of entertainment take a more subliminal approach.

Allie shares that she recently had to stop her young daughter from listening to Barbie music.

“Every single song is about loving yourself and believing in yourself … and if you are just more yourself and you live out your authentic expressions, then you’ll have all the power that you need to accomplish anything that you want in life,” she says.

“It’s laying the exact opposite theological foundation than the one that I want to be set for her, which is that all of your sufficiency and strength and wisdom and power is going to come from Christ, not from yourself at all,” she adds.

Nizza argues that even something as seemingly benign as Disney’s classic “wishing upon a star” trope is designed to confuse and corrupt a child’s identity.

“It just looks like something … hidden in a Barbie movie. I mean, nostalgia plays a big part. It’ll be something again that focuses on yourself, on the idea of your heart, of love, wishing on things like the Disney wishing upon a star,” she says.

“Unfortunately, we’re seeing such disastrous things going on in our culture that are very terrifying quite honestly that revolve around ‘you can be whoever you want, and if you’re not comfortable with where you are, you can change things about yourself.’ … It’s a confusion of identity. That’s what it is,” she declares.

It’s no surprise to Nizza, however, because she believes Satan almost always “attacks through identity.”

“Sex, gender, weight, hair color, whatever it may be. Anything to confuse that person and get them away from having a real identity, a liberating and salvific identity in Christ Jesus,” she says.

“We want [our kids] to know they’re made in the image of God, that He fearfully and wonderfully made them and all of those things, but we need to make sure that they are deriving their confidence from the right places — not from their own power because to me that’s what lays the groundwork for some of this really, really dark and evil stuff,” adds Allie.

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Allie beth stuckey, Christianity, Entertainment, Jenn nizza, New age, Occult, Witchcraft, Blazetv show, Disney, Barbie 

The democratic socialist mayor of New York City gave his personal definition of socialism while on a podcast this week, and many found it to be naive and unserious.

On Thursday’s episode of his “This Past Weekend” podcast, comedian Theo Von asked Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) to define socialism.

‘That’s not socialism, that’s fantasy.’

“I want to talk a little bit about socialism, right, because it’s a buzzword, right?” Von said. “… Will you define socialism for us? Because people say it a lot and don’t know what it is. And sometimes, those people are me.”

Mamdani laughed.

“I’m so happy to be with those people right now,” he responded.

“Socialism, to me, it means that you will have whatever you need to live a dignified life and that it is the government’s job to deliver on that, right?” Mamdani said.

“It’s a belief that you shouldn’t live in a place where all you can do is pick your own leaders,” he added. “You should also be able to have that power in the rest of your life, right? People talk about it as the extension of democracy from the ballot box to the rest of your life.”

The exchange can be viewed below on Von’s podcast.

RELATED: Outrage erupts at apparent insult from Mamdani during 9/11 ceremony

He then explained what dignity meant under his political beliefs.

“When people say dignity, I want to be very clear, we’re talking about the things that allow you to take a breath: housing, child care, right, public transit,” the mayor said. “No one should be priced out of these things. These are non-negotiables; you need these to live.”

He also repeated the well-worn trope that the country was already operating under socialist principles.

“And what I think is so confusing is there’s parts of life in our country that line up with this belief,” Mamdan said. “Public education — we believe that everyone should be able to go K through 12 for free, and they do. Libraries — we believe that everybody should be able to read a book that they’d like to for free, and they do. But when it comes to early childhood education, right — before kindergarten — we’re comfortable with people paying $20,000 a year to afford it.”

Mamdani added, “As a socialist, what I’m fighting for is that nobody is priced out of dignity.”

Many criticized Mamdani for the hollow definition.

“That’s not socialism, that’s fantasy. And that’s what this podcast between Mamdani and Von was all about,” responded columnist Libby Emmons.

“Socialism is very much like the plantation owner-slave relationship,” replied one X user. “You are housed and fed and kept relatively healthy so that you can be of some use to the state and its ruling elites. If Democrats are successful selling this to American descendants of slaves it will be the biggest con job in human history.”

“Some bureaucrat gets to decide what you need and what a dignified life is. I’d rather have no government at all,” said another critic.

A poll in 2020 found that Americans favored capitalism over socialism by a 2-1 margin, but more recent polling has seen many Americans turning toward socialism because of inflation and the affordability crisis.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Theo von, New york city, Zohran mamdani, Socialism, Politics 

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said in an interview that he is considering retiring next year.

Alito told CBS News that the harassment and physical threats judges are receiving are a new danger to the judicial system.

‘We are not part of any political movement. And we are not attempting to further any political agenda.’

CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford asked him if there was a decision that required particular courage, and he said the Dobbs decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was the leading example.

“I think that required courage by all of the justices in the majority,” said Alito.

“Of course … we didn’t know it at the time,” he added. “We didn’t know it when we produced the draft that was leaked, but it required courage to go ahead with that because of the implications.”

He said he had even lost old friendships because of that decision.

“That’s something you have to live with,” Alito added.

“Is that just part of the job being a justice?” she asked. “You’re going to lose friends, you’re going to get protested, you’re going to have death threats, you’re going to have to wear a bulletproof vest today?”

“It’s part of the job that you’re going to displease people by making decisions on controversial matters, because one side or the other is going to really dislike you because of the decisions,” Alito responded.

“The physical threats and the harassment represent something new in our society and something that’s quite disturbing. And I think it’s a danger. It’s a danger for the courts,” he added.

“And it’s a danger for others in public life,” Alito warned.

The 76-year-old went on to say he will consider retiring next year but said it was difficult to predict the political circumstances surrounding the decision.

He also criticized recent presidents for being more vitriolic in their opposition to Supreme Court decisions.

“Did [President Donald] Trump change that?” Crawford asked.

“It’s been bipartisan,” said Alito.

“I want to be evenhanded on this. The criticism of the court by President [Joe] Biden and justices by President Biden and his administration was very harsh. And President Trump has been very harsh.”

RELATED: Supreme Court sides with middle school transgender girl, Alito and Thomas dissent

Win McNamee/Getty Images

He also denied that the judges had a partisan motivation.

“We are not part of any political movement. And we are not attempting to further any political agenda,” said Alito. “We are trying to interpret the Constitution as best we can and apply it in cases that come before us.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Dobbs decision, Political violence, Samuel alito, Us supreme court, Politics