Justice Thomas, you are fooling no one

You might think United States Supreme Court Justices would be even more scrupulous about avoiding the appearance of impropriety than the average federal judge. You might think someone who had risen to one of the most powerful and prestigious positions in the judicial branch of the U.S. government would be conscientious enough to ensure the example he or she set was an honorable one.

In the case of Clarence Thomas, you'd be wrong.

In January the New Yorker published a lengthy article detailing Justice Thomas' wife Ginni's unprecedented and highly problematic political activism. Now, the New York Times has published its own piece on the Thomases, "The Long Crusade of Clarence and Ginni Thomas".

What does her activism have to do with her husband's day job? The Times gives an example:

... Ginni Thomas co-signed a letter in December [2021] calling for House Republicans to expel Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger from their conference for joining the Jan. 6 committee. Thomas and her co-authors said the investigation “brings disrespect to our country’s rule of law” and “legal harassment to private citizens who have done nothing wrong,” adding that they would begin “a nationwide movement to add citizens’ voices to this effort.”

A few weeks later, the Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 to allow the release of records from the Trump White House related to the Jan. 6 attack. Justice Thomas was the sole dissenter.

Nor was the referenced letter Ginni Thomas' first foray into activism. It was only one of many actions she has taken in a long career as a conservative activist.

Her husband's pointed refusal to recuse himself from matters that clearly touch on her activities would have gotten him disciplined long ago if he were an ordinary federal judge. However, the only way to discipline a Supreme Court Justice is impeachment in the Senate, a heavy lift under the best of circumstances and inconceivable as long as the Republican Party is devoid of any principle save blind loyalty to the ex-domestic Dear Leader.

What does Clarence Thomas himself say to critics like me? Again, from the Times:

... Orin Kerr, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said that while there are no clear-cut rules outlining when justices need to recuse themselves, there are appearance concerns. “I’m sure there are justices’ spouses who have had strong opinions about politics,” Kerr said. “What’s unusual here is that Justice Thomas’s wife is an activist in politics. Historically, this is the first example of something like this that I can think of at the Supreme Court.”

Justice Thomas has flipped such criticisms on their head, saying that those who raise such issues were “bent on undermining” the court.

To repeat: Clarence Thomas says that doubters like me are "bent on undermining" the Court. His psychological projection would be laughable, were we not living in an age where brazen disregard for truth is taken for gospel in some benighted quarters.

Justice Thomas, you're full of it.

You're annoyed at being called out for actually undermining the Court's reputation, so you peddle this horse manure. Heck, you might even believe it.

The rest of us, however, don't. We know better. And we'll make sure history knows you tried to gaslight us.

You aren't fooling anyone.