On Tuesday morning, NPR published and then retracted a professional obituary of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's time on the bench. The story, authored by veteran SCOTUS reporter Nina Totenberg, claimed Alito was retiring minutes after justices handed down landmark decisions on transgender athletes and birthright citizenship.
The erroneous article, published at 10:51 a.m. ET, stated that 'Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the Supreme Court's opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, is retiring, the court announced Tuesday.' However, a photo caption in the story said Alito retired on Friday, which would have been July 3. With no formal announcement from the high court, NPR retracted the entire piece within minutes of publication.
Totenberg appeared on LiveNOW Fox television later that day to explain what happened. She said she slipped out of the courtroom before justices officially gaveled the term to a close and then asked someone what was going on inside.
'I misunderstood the answer, and thought that somebody had suggested that Justice Alito was retiring,' Totenberg said. 'I wasn't in the courtroom. This is all on me. This is not on the network.' She added that she did not hear the plural 's' at the end of 'announcements' when someone told her about retirement activity.
What the Left Is Saying
Democratic supporters and media observers have emphasized Totenberg's decades-long reputation for accuracy in covering the nation's highest court. The veteran reporter has been covering the Supreme Court since 1975, widely regarded as one of the most reliable sources on legal affairs journalism.
Defenders of NPR point out that pre-writing obituaries and retirement stories is standard practice at major news organizations to ensure timely coverage when public figures pass away or leave office. They note that Totenberg took immediate personal responsibility for the error rather than deflecting blame to editors or colleagues.
Some progressive commentators argued that the quick retraction demonstrated the outlet's commitment to accuracy, noting that NPR corrected the record within minutes of publishing the erroneous story and broadcast an on-air correction.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative critics have seized on the incident as evidence of rushed reporting at major media outlets. They note that the false story briefly sparked speculation about President Donald Trump potentially nominating a fourth Supreme Court justice before November midterm elections.
Republican strategists argued the error, while quickly corrected, could undermine public confidence in mainstream media coverage of significant legal developments. Some conservative commentators pointed to the incident as part of broader concerns about verification practices at legacy news organizations.
President Trump moved to end federal funding for NPR last year, saying the outlet has 'spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as news.' The White House did not immediately comment on Tuesday's retraction.
What the Numbers Show
NPR retracted the story within minutes of publication. The erroneous article was live on the website for a brief period before being removed with an editor's note stating that neither Alito nor the Supreme Court's public information office had announced his retirement, according to reporting by The New York Times. NPR Editor in Chief Tommy Evans confirmed in a statement that 'as soon as the error was realized, the story was retracted and removed from NPR's website.' Totenberg is 82 years old and has covered the Supreme Court for more than five decades.
The Bottom Line
The incident represents an embarrassing breakdown in editorial verification at one of the nation's most prominent public radio outlets. NPR did not independently verify the information because the article cited a public announcement rather than confidential sources, which typically undergo stricter internal review. Totenberg apologized directly to Justice Alito in writing, calling it 'the worst professional mistake' of her career. What happens next involves standard newsroom accountability measures, including potential editorial reviews of pre-written content protocols and verification requirements before publication.