The Washington Post published a lengthy article this week about the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and her outspoken nature and social media activity are seen by some to be problematic:

The Post got some help in sounding the alarm about Ginni Thomas:

Under different circumstances, liberals might be calling in the Handmaid’s Tale cosplay activists to protect her right to speak out, but since we’re not talking about an outspoken liberal, things are different:

Get the Handmaid’s Tale activists back in DC!

The Post reports that there’s nothing wrong in any policy sense with Thomas’ wife being outspoken, but that it’s nevertheless troubling:

There is no official policy or protocol preventing Ginni Thomas from going full MAGA. It’s her First Amendment right to fulminate that America is becoming a godless, socialist nightmare and to practice the dark art of political messaging on social media.

But it doesn’t reflect well on the institution of the court, says Deborah L. Rhode, a law professor and scholar of legal ethics at Stanford University.

What would have been the tone of the article if Thomas was an outspoken liberal?

Ruth Bader Ginsburg wins applause from liberals when she speaks out about politics (and Trump), but the wife of a conservative justice speaking her mind is apparently problematic for many.