No, because the quasars weren't aligned with each other globally (cosmologically), it appears they are aligned with whatever structure they are embedded in at large scales. I think the term is a filament, but I'm not sure.

If every quasar wherever we looked was aligned such that their axes of rotation were parallal, that would be a huge blow to the cosmological principal. Or more spookily, suppose all of the quasars studied were oriented with their poles lining up to some point in the universe. A good hint that some God created the universe for us, for example, would be for every single quasar's axis of rotation to be pointing at the earth.

But those things do not seem to be the case, and the cosmological principal appears to hold. Look at any corner of the universe, and quasars point in an arbitrary direction. Look at another corner, and they point in a different arbitrary direction. Zoom out, and now there is no cohesive direction. Homogeneity is preserved at scales much smaller than the largest structures we've observed, because the chains of quasars are themselves much smaller than the filaments and other super-structures that snake through the observable universe.

The principle is meant to apply only at a sufficiently large scale. If any particular scale goes against the principle, one can enlarge the scale to see if the principle still applies.

The alignments are exactly on the same scale of the filaments. It would be a contradition to the cosmological principle if, say, the alignments occurred only on one celestial hemisphere.