In today's decision, Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, the Supreme Court held that the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply to the particular facts of a case where a biological father sought to block adoption of his daughter. The dad is a member of the Cherokee Nation and there was no dispute that the child he had with a non-Indian mother was nonetheless subject to the the ICWA. But I sensed that it irked Justice Alito that the child was subject to a law designed to protect the Native American community because on two occasions in the opinion he noted that the little girl was 3/256th Cherokee - notwithstanding the fact that this detailed fact added nothing to the opinion.
(Justice Sotomayor, in her dissent, noted these mentions, saying "the majority’s repeated, analytically unnecessary references to the fact that Baby Girl is 3/256 Cherokee by ancestry do nothing to elucidate its intimation that the statute may violate the Equal Protection Clause as applied here.")
Perhaps Alito was being strategic, thinking references to fractional human identity would trigger bad memories of the Three Fifths Compromise. Or maybe it was just him being churlish, in the same way he apparently behaves when certain liberal Justices read their decisions or dissents in open court.