In a country that respected the rule of law, a Supreme Court Justice

[madaboutharry]

with a spouse who advocated overthrowing a presidential election would be forced to resign.

Ginni Thomas is an insurrectionist and a traitor.

What does it take?

Ginni and Clarence Thomas are corrupt partisans and Justice Thomas should not be sitting on the SC deciding how the American people live their lives.

[Tetrachloride]

1. I believe its long past due to up the rhetoric vs the Court esp

in terms of prison

[cate94]

2. In a country that respects the rule of law

Supreme Court Justices would not perjure themselves while under oath.

[madaboutharry]

4. That too!

The entire process is corrupt. And the American people are on to it. The majority of Americans do not respect the SC and the Justices are so......insulted!

[Mr. Evil]

15. Hell Yeah!

And the DoJ springs to action when peaceful protesters appear at their houses because they might be about to take a giant shit on every woman in this country. Fuck them! They are just boot-licking lackeys. They aren't worthy by any sense of serving on the SCOTUS.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Even if we believed that the justice could separate his...

judicial philosophy and his wife's political actions, there nothing to say that we must hsve this particular justice on the Court.

[Ms. Toad]

5. I would frame it differently - no one is responsible for their spouse's behavior.

BUT - when he was determining whether to participate in the case deciding whether to turn over Trump's communications on January 6, knowing his wife's publically state support for Trump, for challenging the election, and access to Trump, he was on notice that he had an ethical obligation to inquire and to abstain once he determined his wife's communications were among those which he was deciding should or should not be disclosed.

His own unethical behavior should be sanctioned. Not because his wife advocated overthrowing a presidential election, but because he failed to inquire (and recuse himself) when faced with the likelihood that his wife's communications were likely the subject of a case on which he was ruling.

[brush]

7. This exactly. IMO all of the trump nominated justices...

should go too. McTurtle stole one, Gorsuch is winger extremist, and Coney Barrett is straight out of "The Handmaids Tale". And that's not all, she's strict construtionist and when the Constitution was written, women were the property of their husband and couldn't even vote, much less be a SCOTUS justice. It's just silly. Plus she lied too about abortion rights to get crammed onto the court before RBG was even cold in her grave.

[UTUSN]

6. K&R

[ToxMarz]

8. Although it seems to be a known fact, not widely enough reported IMHO

I just heard it today and I'm not totally in the dark. John Eastman, the architect of the insurrection, was the law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Coincidence?!

That should be mentioned with every reporting of Ginni's seeming involvement as well.

All these characters that seem to come out of nowhere, you wonder how do they get in such prominent positions of influence. The answer is, they don't come out of nowhere.

[MacKasey]

9. If Clarence Thomas was a man of principles, he would resigned immediately

But he is NOT

He has no moral principles!

[MadameButterfly]

10. It was known that

he was perverse, abusive, and basically not qualified for the Supreme Court from the beginning. But Poppy Bush had to appoint a Black guy to the Supreme Court, and all the qualified ones were Democrats.

Unfortunately this was one of Biden's bigger mistakes.

[Ferrets are Cool]

12. Help me out please. What part was Bidens Mistake?

[Wednesdays]

16. Biden was on the Judiciary Committee that held hearings on Thomas before his confirmation

Judge for yourself:

IIRC, Biden voted "no" to Thomas' nomination, but Thomas won the seat anyway.
Not sure what more Joe Biden could have done then.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

17. Biden was head of the judiciary committee in the Senate.

Those hearings were massively controversial. And we know one thing now to be true, when you're being attacked. Go on offense. And that truth is not necessary.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/472397-clarence-thomas-blasts-his-biden-led-confirmation-hearings-the-idea-was-to-get-rid/

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/02/10/joe-biden-knows-a-thing-or-ten-about-picking-a-supreme-court-justice-

[MadameButterfly]

21. Biden didn't allow witnesses who could corroborate Anita Hill to testify

in person. Rather he let them submit written statements. These witnesses had had experiences relevant to Hill's claims. It was a big deal that the American public didn't know about those witnesses because almost nobody read those statements. Most people didn't know Thomas had a pattern and Hill was not the only one.

Biden was worried about seeming to attack a Black nominee. And as a society we were not educated on the issue of sexual harrassment. It was a serious error. i don't know if it would have changed the outcome, but Hill was treated unfairly, and perhaps the American people too.

[Ferrets are Cool]

11. What does it take? Shooting someone on Broadway?

Oh wait.

[2naSalit]

13. He exhibits poor judgement...

Which indicates that he is not worthy of his position.

[bringthePaine]

14. clearly a case of insurrectile dysfunction🧐

[calimary]

19. Oooooh! GOOD one!

[hay rick]

18. The Roberts Court has turned into a cruel joke. nt

[bringthePaine]

20. clearly a case of insurrectile dysfunction🧐