General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Clarence and Ginni Thomas problem
March 19, 2022, 5:30 AM EDT
By Wayne Batchis, associate professor of political science at the University of Delaware
... if anything has the potential to awaken us from our stupor of exhaustion, it must be the recent news that Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, attended the Jan. 6 populist rally at the Ellipse in Washington, which preceded that day's Capitol riot. Not to diminish voters very legitimate concerns about Americas elected officials, but politicians and political movements come and go. Without trust in the courts, American democracy does not stand a chance ...
... It is rare, if not unheard of, for the spouse of a justice to play such a prominent and active role in partisan politics, if only because this might create the potential appearance of impropriety. A judge, of course, is expected to objectively apply the law, without a preconceived commitment to a particular outcome.
The American people .. are not fools. While we may hope, and believe, that judges make their best effort to remain fair and impartial, people likely understand that the modern Supreme Court decides many issues that overlap with our most deeply held beliefs ... Jan. 6, however, is entirely different terrain.
... Thomas not only sat on the board of an organization that promoted the dangerous fiction that the 2020 election was stolen from former President Donald Trump through fraud, she also attended the rally attempting to vindicate this paranoid propagandistic fantasy ... All the while, in what might resemble the coordinated efforts of synchronized swimmers, husband and wife seemingly sought to thwart the investigation into the democratically perilous events of Jan. 6. Ginni Thomas signed on to a letter seeking the expulsion of Republican Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger from the Republican conference for joining the House Jan. 6 investigation committee; Clarence Thomas was the sole dissenter standing in opposition to the rest of the court, including its three Trump appointees in a decision allowing for the release of Jan. 6-related documents to said committee ...
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-court-s-clarence-thomas-ginni-thomas-problem-ncna1292351
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)of that happening, though.
old as dirt
(1,972 posts)snip----------------
In response to questions about the call relayed through a publicist, Ms. Thomas confirmed that she had left a message on Ms. Hills voicemail.
I did place a call to Ms. Hill at her office extending an olive branch to her after all these years, in hopes that we could ultimately get passed what happened so long ago, Ms. Thomas said in a statement provided to The New York Times.
That offer still stands, her statement went on. I would be very happy to meet and talk with her if she would be willing to do the same. Certainly no offense was ever intended.
Ms. Thomas did not explain why she had reached out to Ms. Hill at this time.
ABC News quoted from the voicemail.
Good morning, Anita Hill, its Ginny Thomas, she said, according to ABC News. I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. Okay have a good day.
While Ms. Thomas described the call as an attempt to reach out, the university appeared to be taking the matter more seriously.
Andrew Gully, senior vice president of the Brandeis University Communications office, confirmed that Ms. Hill had received the message, that she had turned it over to the campus Department of Public Safety Monday. They, in turn, passed it on to the FBI.
I though it was certainly inappropriate, Ms. Hill said in an interview. It came in at 7:30 a.m. on my office phone from somebody I didnt know, and she is asking for an apology. It was not invited. There was no background for it."
snip----------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/us/politics/20thomas.html?_r=2
calimary
(80,693 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2022, 09:55 PM - Edit history (1)
NOT an apology TO your ass, Ginni.
It's the other way around, Ginni. You and your miserable husband owe HER an apology (not that we'd believe you meant it with any sincerity, even if you ever DID apologize, Ginni).
struggle4progress
(118,032 posts)Published: Mar. 20, 2022, 8:15 a.m.
By Star-Ledger Editorial Board
Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, sits on a board of the Council for National Policy, an ultra-conservative organization that encourages political leaders to contest the 2020 election results ...
... She believes that America is under threat from the deep state and the fascist left and from transsexual fascists ...
... the New Yorker .. detailed how the Center for Security Policy paid Ginni Thomass company $236,000 over two years for consulting work -- even as it was filing an amicus brief in favor of Trumps Muslim travel ban. The court upheld those travel restrictions by a 5-4 vote, with Clarence Thomas in the majority.
Federal judges are guided by a code of conduct. Among them: A judge cannot sit in judgment of something that involves a family member; and the judge must recuse even if there is the appearance of impropriety.
Unfortunately, the rules are different in the highest court, where justices decide for themselves ...
https://www.nj.com/opinion/2022/03/when-the-judges-wife-is-a-wingnut-editorial.html
struggle4progress
(118,032 posts)BY JOHN KRUZEL - 03/19/22 06:02 AM EDT
... Virginia Thomas should be able to back whatever causes motivate her. The problem is that Justice Thomas continues to participate in cases related to her political activities, said Steven Lubet, a professor of legal ethics at Northwestern University Law School. He is the one whose conduct should be questioned ...
In Clarence Thomass three decades on the bench, he has never stepped aside from a case due to a real or perceived conflict of interest resulting from his wifes political activities ...
Ethical scrutiny of the justice and his spouse has waxed and waned over the years. A prominent example arose from the courts 5-4 ruling in Bush v. Gore that handed the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush.
At the time that Clarence Thomas cast a decisive vote for Bush, Ginni Thomas worked at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, where she was recruiting personnel to staff a future Bush administration ...
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/598843-ginni-thomass-activism-sparks-ethics-questions-for-supreme-court
Response to struggle4progress (Reply #4)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
SoCalDavidS
(9,998 posts)struggle4progress
(118,032 posts)Sarah Al-Arshani Mar 19, 2022, 8:32 PM
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife co-hosted a banquet as part of a symposium that featured the founder of the Oath Keepers ...
https://www.businessinsider.com/clarence-thomas-wife-oath-keepers-founder-featured-together-at-event-2022-1
oasis
(49,150 posts)struggle4progress
(118,032 posts)... every Democratic member of the House of Representatives should be Googling .. "Samuel Chase" ...
... his long and distinguished résumé didnt win him many fans. The conservative mayor of Annapolis called him a busy, restless incendiary, a ringleader of mobs, a foul-mouthed and inflaming son of discord and faction ...
... In 1804, nine years into Chases term on the court, Jefferson and his allies turned to what is still the only way to force a justice out: impeachment ...
... Chase remains the only Supreme Court justice in American history to be impeached. And it was not for some conflict of interest or violation of judicial ethics. It was because his political opponents, including the then-president, thought he was too partisan to rule in a fair or impartial manner ...
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/why-supreme-court-justice-clarence-thomas-could-be-impeached-n1292076
Joinfortmill
(14,231 posts)struggle4progress
(118,032 posts)By Nyamekye Daniel | March 16, 2022
... Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, told The Washington Post the fact that the justices wife attended the rally should be cause alone for recusal.
Because of her participation in that rally, which then led to the breach of the Capitol, which then led to the January 6 committee
that means that you, as a justice, your impartiality still might reasonably be questioned, Roth said ...
https://atlantablackstar.com/2022/03/16/a-clear-appearance-of-bias-clarence-thomas-wife-admits-she-was-present-at-jan-6-rally-but-insists-her-husband-was-not-involved-calls-grow-for-justice-thomas-resignation/
BigmanPigman
(51,430 posts)insurrectionist wifey to Hell with him when he dies (which I hope is within 24 hours).
Deuxcents
(15,776 posts)Blue Owl
(49,902 posts)calimary
(80,693 posts)The Spring Clarence Sale! Everything Must Go!
Especially him! And take Ginni with you on your way out the door, dude.
BonnieJW
(2,245 posts)so you might get your wish. Flu symptoms
BigmanPigman
(51,430 posts)When he drops dead I will dance in the streets.
I hate that muther with a passion...as much as I hate both Putin and his BFF, the fucking moron. He has destroyed and killed many indirectly through his actions as SCOTUS justice. He is personally responsible for thousands of Americans' pain and suffering. KARMA!!! Rot in Hell asshole!
Buckeyeblue
(5,491 posts)Don't forget when Thomas didn't disclose that his wife was paid $800k/year as part of a job with a conservative think-tank. He said it was an oversight, which we all know is bullshit.
calimary
(80,693 posts)3catwoman3
(23,812 posts)
are not fools.
An unfortunately large proportion of them are.
Blue Owl
(49,902 posts)Joinfortmill
(14,231 posts)bringthePaine
(1,726 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)are responsible, or fairly subject to criticism, for actions of their spouses.
Now, Clarence T is subject for his own actions or inactions.
czarjak
(11,191 posts)Joinfortmill
(14,231 posts)Larissa
(786 posts)Clarence Thomas has sat on the Supreme Court for some 31 years in near utter silence -- save for some grumbles, grunts or a few miscellaneous utterances. A paper weight could have served the same purpose.
Clarence replaced Justice Thurgood Marshall who had argued 19 cases before he U.S. Supreme Court as Solicitor General. Justice Marshall argued the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, before the Supreme Court in 1954, where the Supreme Court justices ruled unanimously that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional.
If Clarence is still not feeling better, he can just phone it in. At least Clarence can claim, in his defense, that the Great Sphinx of Giza beats him by over 4,000 years when it comes to lumping it on a log.
AdamGG
(1,275 posts)Hopefully 50% aren't, but 40% certainly are.