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:
What is Ginni Thomas saying now? The evolution of an unusually outspoken Supreme Court spouse https://t.co/D8wCPLWO1e
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) December 27, 2018
When she moved to D.C., Ginni Thomas joined a cult. She later broke away from it, dreamed of being a congresswoman, married a future SCOTUS justice & instead became a conservative warrior who loves making trouble. A few thousand words on the troublemaker: https://t.co/uzsTFvfOjb
— Dan Zak (@MrDanZak) December 27, 2018
The Post got some help in sounding the alarm about Ginni Thomas:
"Does it matter that the spouse of a SCOTUS justice is sharing such nakedly partisan, erroneous propaganda? Or have we hit the point at which this kind of rhetoric has been so normalized that, well, why wouldn't a prominent party activist be doing this?" https://t.co/X2tEp6nqi5
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 28, 2018
.@MrDanZak: “Does it matter that the spouse of a Supreme Court justice is sharing such nakedly partisan, erroneous propaganda? Or have we hit the point at which this kind of rhetoric has been so normalized…?” https://t.co/WVoTK2UzvK
— Connie Schultz (@ConnieSchultz) December 28, 2018
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:
The Washington Post strongly suggests the wives of conservative Supreme Court justices shouldn't be politically active. How feminist. https://t.co/yrZK5o1SUL
— Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) December 28, 2018
Democrats would like Justice Thomas to get his wife under control, very progressive https://t.co/Mm7rL6qBOc
— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) December 28, 2018
I know, right? These husbands need to keep their wives silent. Maybe make them wear bonnets. https://t.co/8uXybNwSS5
— Cuffy (@CuffyMeh) December 28, 2018
Get the Handmaid’s Tale activists back in DC!
Thomas cannot do his job as a Justice because his wife has political opinions is a garbage take based blatantly on sexism, ignorance of the judicial process, and double standards. https://t.co/PDTV4gRES7
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) December 28, 2018
These people do realize that women can think for themselves, right? Spouses don’t always agree. More importantly, Thomas’ own political views would only be relevant if there was evidence he was deciding cases based on something other than the law.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) December 28, 2018
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?
Stephen Breyer's wife is a minister. Should he recuse himself from all religious liberty cases? No, of course not. He's a liberal. https://t.co/pKgUusLrpU
— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) December 28, 2018
“Shut your woman’s mouth!” – Democrats https://t.co/gLpBRDO7q3
— #1 Tik Tok Fan (@BisonBlood) December 28, 2018
Funny how I don't recall any comments from this partisan reporter when Justice RBG made biased political comments. https://t.co/IJ1H3iQN0v
— Jack (@NBA_GM) December 28, 2018
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.
