A liberal activist secretly recorded Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., suggesting the latter revealed bias.

Lauren Windsor recorded the two justices at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual dinner last week.

In one exchange with Justice Alito, posing as a conservative, she said the country needed to return to “a place of godliness.”

“I agree with you. I agree with you,” Justice Alito responded.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said the political rift between the left and the right would be extremely difficult to repair and that one side was “going to win,” according to secretly recorded comments at a private event earlier this month.

Lauren Windsor, who describes herself as a documentarian and journalist, shared recordings of two encounters with Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts at an annual event held by the Supreme Court Historical Society on June 3. She said she posed as a religious conservative and held discussions with both men.

Conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in a secret recording made public on Monday by a liberal activist can be heard agreeing with the sentiment that the U.S. should return "to a place of godliness."

Reuters could not independently verify the authenticity of the recording that activist Lauren Windsor posted on social media and provided to the media outlet Rolling Stone.

A spokesperson for the Supreme Court declined to comment. A Rolling Stone spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

A Florida man was sentenced Monday to 14 months in prison for threatening to kill Chief Justice John Roberts last year.

Neal Brij Sidhwaney, 43, of Fernandina Beach, Florida, pleaded guilty in December to transmitting an interstate threat to kill. He had faced up to five years in federal prison. Sidhwaney was also sentenced to three years of supervised release following his imprisonment.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse filed an ethics complaint against Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., alleging he violated judicial standards, including when Alito said Congress doesn’t have the power to regulate the high court after the Senate Judiciary Committee approved an ethics bill.

In striking down the Biden administration’s student loan forgiveness program, the Supreme Court ignored one of the most basic principles of law: When the text of a law is clear, it must be followed unless it is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court struck down the Biden administration’s student loan forgiveness plan on Friday.

While the bombshell ruling will undoubtedly be a blow to borrowers who had hoped — perhaps even expected — they’d have up to $20,000 of their student debt erased, the verdict is unlikely to be consequential for the U.S. economy at large, economists said.

“The Supreme Court decision to strike down loan forgiveness should have no meaningful impact on the economy,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics.

The Supreme Court struck down President Joe Biden’s obviously unconstitutional attempt to forgive half a trillion in student loan debt. This should surprise nobody, given that virtually everyone admitted the president does not have the authority to do this. (Here is then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stating as much.)

The Supreme Court remains "committed" to ensuring that justices uphold the "highest standards of conduct," Chief Justice John Roberts declared Tuesday.

Roberts made the statement during an awards ceremony in Washington, D.C., lightly acknowledging the ongoing attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas over ethics claims. Roberts nevertheless told the audience at the American Law Institute (ALI) that neither Congress nor the executive branch should interfere in the court's affairs.