Jane Mayer: Is Ginni Thomas a Threat to the Supreme Court?

[babylonsister]

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/31/is-ginni-thomas-a-threat-to-the-supreme-court

Is Ginni Thomas a Threat to the Supreme Court?
Behind closed doors, Justice Clarence Thomas’s wife is working with many groups directly involved in controversial cases before the Court.
By Jane Mayer
January 21, 2022


snip//

The claim that the Justices’ opinions are politically neutral is becoming increasingly hard to accept, especially from Thomas, whose wife, Virginia (Ginni) Thomas, is a vocal right-wing activist. She has declared that America is in existential danger because of the “deep state” and the “fascist left,” which includes “transsexual fascists.” Thomas, a lawyer who runs a small political-lobbying firm, Liberty Consulting, has become a prominent member of various hard-line groups. Ginni Thomas’s political activism has caused controversy for years. For the most part, it has been dismissed as the harmless action of an independent spouse. But now the Court appears likely to secure victories for her allies in a number of highly polarizing cases—on abortion, affirmative action, and gun rights.

Many Americans first became aware of Ginni Thomas’s activism on January 6, 2021. That morning, before the Stop the Steal rally in Washington, D.C., turned into an assault on the Capitol resulting in the deaths of at least five people, she cheered on the supporters of President Donald Trump who had gathered to overturn Biden’s election. In a Facebook post that went viral, she linked to a news item about the protest, writing, “LOVE MAGA people!!!!” Shortly afterward, she posted about Ronald Reagan’s famous “A Time for Choosing” speech. Her next status update said, “GOD BLESS EACH OF YOU STANDING UP or PRAYING.” Two days after the insurrection, she added a disclaimer to her feed, noting that she’d written the posts “before violence in US Capitol.” (The posts are no longer public.)



snip//

For lawyers involved in cases before the Supreme Court, it can be deeply disturbing to know that Ginni Thomas is an additional opponent. In 2019, David Dinielli, the visiting lecturer at Yale Law School, was a deputy legal director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which had submitted an amicus brief in a gay-rights case before the Court. He told me he was acutely aware that Ginni Thomas and other members of the Council for National Policy loathed the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks right-wing hate groups. In 2017, C.N.P. Action directed its members to “commit to issuing one new post on Facebook and Twitter each week about the Southern Poverty Law Center to discredit them.” In Thomas’s leaked 2018 speech to the Council for National Policy, she denounced the S.P.L.C. for calling the Family Research Council—which is militantly opposed to L.G.B.T.Q. rights—a hate group.

For Dinielli, the idea that a Justice’s spouse belonged to a group that had urged its members to repeatedly attack his organization was “counter to everything you’d expect if you want to get a fair shake” before the Court. He explained, “These activities aren’t just political. They’re aimed at raising up or denigrating actors specifically in front of the Supreme Court. She’s one step away from holding up a sign in front of her husband saying ‘This person is a pedophile.’ ”

Dinielli went on, “The Justices sit literally above where the lawyers are. For these people to do the job they were tasked with, they have to maintain that level. But this degrades it, mocks it, and threatens it.” He warned, “Since the Court doesn’t have an army, it relies on how it behaves to command respect. Once the veneer cracks, it’s very hard to get it back.” ?

[RandySF]

1. She's a threat to America.

[justhanginon]

8. That was my immediate thought also!

[Harker]

23. +33. n/t

[JustAnotherGen]

2. Yes - she is

If spouses of members in Congress being in Financial Services positions, which leads to wealth . . . should be a 'reason' to distrust say - Nancy Pelosi . . . then it must also be applied to SCOTUS.

Our side should be applying the same rules to SCOTUS as I've been reading folks want applied to members of the House who are Democratic Party members.

A little outrage at our opposition's spouses' behavior would be good. Just a little bit folks.

Ginni Thomas is evil.

[2naSalit]

3. Absolutely!

She has been all along.

And her husband should recuse himself from all cases regarding J6 and anything involving tfg.

[Rebl2]

7. I second

that. He SHOULD recuse himself from anything to do with 1/6, but you know he won’t.

[Trust_Reality]

12. He should recuse himself permanently! (Retire)

The right wing PAC, a.k.a. Supreme Court, is a damn disgrace.

[Rebl2]

19. Oh I wish

[Hieronymus Phact]

24. There needs to be a loud outcry

This of course will not happen if no one with a microphone bothers to turn up the volume on it.

[2naSalit]

25. True and true.

Welcome to DU!

[Hieronymus Phact]

37. Why can't Democrats DO That?

Last edited Fri Jan 21, 2022, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Everyone knows by now, nobody else will do it for them.
Do they really still need lessons in righteous performative outrage?
How about a new rule: No press conference without someone yelling about this for at least half the time allotted.

& Thanks, You're all so welcoming here!

[dem4decades]

4. Hasn't he cried about the Court being perceived as political, and he didn't like it? Typical Repub

these days. Accuse others of what you are.

[KS Toronado]

18. The right has projection down to an art form

Can't believe they call us fascists when that's all they are. And the history books will prove it
because of their Jan 6th actions.

[wnylib]

43. Ginni's complaint about

"left wing fascists" is an oxymoron.

Ginni is just a moron.

[lagomorph777]

5. No, the majority on SCROTUS are in cahoots with her.

However, SCROTUS is a threat to the nation.

[Hortensis]

6. Coming from Jane Mayer, serious business and serious analysis.

Ginni Thomas's slimy, extremely unethical far-right political actions have been making news for years, of course. Since Justice Thomas, and she of course, never reined them in, I decided a long time ago that they likely provide as good, or even better, an insight into her husband's unstated thinking as his published decisions do his legal positions.

Many observers believe he's most extreme RW justice on the court. and that's saying a lot, and recently that his decisions may be deeply affected by his lifelong black nationalist ideology and hostilities, which represent few even among black conservatives.

Quite a pair.

[L. Coyote]

9. Is Clarence Thomas a threat to the Supreme Court?

His wife is irrelevant, she isn't the one voting.

Link to tweet

[GB_RN]

10. I Bet She Actually Writes Clarence "Uncle Slappy" Thomas' Opinions...

When the court has those strange, 8-1 decisions - and he's almost always that lone dissent, I bet she's the reason behind it and the person who writes it (or helps write it). I say that because his solo opinions are always meth-induced, PCP-injected, LSD-influenced, batshit crazy. All the legal experts pan his shit as 🤡-ish, at best.

[LisaM]

11. This goes back to 2000.

She was on the George W. Bush inaugural committee. Clarence Thomas never should have participated in Bush v. Gore. I can't believe the media didn't pick up on that at the time.

[turbinetree]

13. Yeah.....and I second the motion.....

[hurple]

14. Perhaps he should be made to choose...

His wife, or his seat.

Can't have both.

[Farmer-Rick]

15. Most of those judges on the Supremes represent the worse of America

You have the newest member Amy slave-wife, who is controlled by her husband and shackled to religion as if she were a medieval serf.

The next newish judge weenie whipper and sexual predator frat boy Brett. His oh so extreme misogyny is on par with any rapist or serial wife abuser.

Then there is justice Clarence who has a recorded history of sexual harassment in the workplace that would put frat boy Brett to shame. Aside that, he lied about his wife and the bribes she gets on his financial disclosure forms. But what's that compared to his laziness and ignorance of the law?

That's the highlights of the 9 judges who vote like crazy anti-vaxxers and ignore precident and law when throwing around their crazy anti-science, GOP approved opinions. These are the idiots who are judging our laws ...not that they care much about the law. It's a tool for them to turn America into a capitalist hell.

The Supreme Court is broken.

[Duppers]

41. Perfect description!

Thanks.

[dchill]

16. Magic 8 Ball says: It is decidedly so.

[genxlib]

17. Calling her an activist really misses the point

She is a lobbyist and gets paid to influence people. The fact that her biggest influence is over a Supreme Court Justice makes it a conduit for bribery.

Calling it a conflict of interest (which it certainly is) understates the seriousness of the situation. The Thomas family can be directly enriched by people who need a vote. That is more than a conflict. It is straight up bribery.

[zentrum]

21. The above says it perfectly.

[DeeNice]

26. +1 yeppers nt

[pandr32]

33. + me as well!

[zentrum]

20. She's the tenth Justice.

[gibraltar72]

22. Anyone associated with Midvale College is a threat to America.

[maxsolomon]

27. It's been obvious for decades.

Nothing will be done about it, and he'll serve another decade at a minimum.

Sorry to be a cynic, but it's warranted.

[Initech]

28. What was her role in the insurrection? That seems like a fact worth knowing.

[calimary]

31. Don't know but it's WELL worth investigating.

[Mr. Ected]

29. If Ginni is a ninny, CT must choose to recuse

Since apparently Supreme Court Justices are self-policing and not subject to peer review or oversight by any other branch of government, Thomas is able to flaunt objectivity and vote however he damn well pleases.

Time to expand the Court.

[jaxexpat]

35. He has devoted his tenure on Mt. Olympus to smearing perversity as if it were peanut butter.

Could his wife be a bad actor? Does the bagel fall creme cheese side down onto your shirt/tie 2 minutes before a meeting of the board of directors where you're giving a presentation about appearances being the cornerstone of your approach to success, entitled, "Neatness Counts: dress for it and look like a winner"?

[calimary]

30. YES.

[Takket]

32. She is not a threat IF

her husband recuses himself from decisions involving issues his wife is outspoken about in public, since that is a clear conflict of interest.

That being said, he will never recuse himself because his has no ethics.

[tishaLA]

34. Respectfully, it's a bit late in the game

for a writer of Ms Mayer's clout to start asking this question. It should have been a constant refrain at least since 2010 when her TP activities went into full bloom, but instead she's had more than a decade to expand her network and use her influence in ways we can't even begin to know about.

[liberalla]

36. Well, that veneer has definitely CRACKED...

[Cha]

38. It's Gaslighting Ginni's

Lobbying Firm

[Hassler]

39. Don't know, but the Justice Department is a threat to Ginni

That's why Clarence voted to keep Chump's records secret.

[mahina]

40. If anybody knows it's Jane Mayer.

[summer_in_TX]

42. The byline definitely got MY attention.

Not many have years of reporting at the Wall Street Journal, followed by decades at The New Yorker, who have done the kind of well-substantiated stories that Jane Mayer has done. Especially "Dark Money."

[Sherman A1]

44. Yes,

No doubt about it.

[NurseJackie]

45. Corrupt. Unqualified. He needs to resign now.