
If there’s one thing the ruling establishment is skilled at, it’s determining that it follows a different rulebook than conservatives and the rank and file American public. This is clearly demonstrated in calls for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself.
The high court is set to hear arguments on former President Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity next week.
Trump rightly insists he is immune from prosecution for acts undertaken in his capacity as president. The assertion is a key part of his defense against Democratic persecution over his role in the Jan. 6 demonstration.
Thomas’ wife Ginni is well known for her activism in conservative causes, and this is too much for the left to stomach. But does a spouse’s viewpoints raise a conflict of interest?
Apparently not when those opinions are on the extreme side of left-wing ideology.
Ginni Thomas expressed the same concerns as millions of Americans after the contentious 2020 presidential election. This is no different than Democrats who regularly question the process when their chosen candidate is defeated.
Justice Thomas has no reason to recuse from upcoming Presidential immunity case b/c of wife’s political activism, consistent w/ practice of liberal judges & their spouses’ activism. The Left invents new recusal standards for Thomas for political ends. https://t.co/2XD3SpAwED
— Mark Paoletta (@MarkPaoletta) April 18, 2024
However, Democrats and their establishment media allies ignore reality and carry on with their attempts to smear the Thomas family. They asserted without merit that Mrs. Thomas violated ethical standards and attempted to level the same accusation at the justice.
But they blatantly ignore the obvious fact that many judges are wed to spouses who are employed in Washington and advocate for various causes.
The list of examples is too long to even scratch the surface, but take the trials of the 45th president as a shining example.
Not only have the judges themselves made many statements that clearly demonstrated their prejudice in the cases, but some have family members who are also vehemently anti-Trump.
The left would never stand for a MAGA supporter to sit in judgment of the former president, but it has no issue with his opponents deciding his fate.
The recusal statute only applies if a judge’s family may profit financially from a ruling or if an impartial observer could reasonably ascertain bias. While there are clear examples in the Trump trials, the same cannot be said for the Thomas family.