The New Yorker Lies Again In Hit On Clarence Thomas And Wife That Falsely Claims He Attended A DC Ev

[Kamaji]

The New Yorker Lies Again In Hit On Clarence Thomas And Wife That Falsely Claims He Attended A DC Event

By Mark Paoletta
January 24, 2022

Jane Mayer of The New Yorker magazine and her fellow lefties are ramping up attacks on conservative Supreme Court justices, as they fear the court is getting ready to issue a host of decisions they won’t like, most especially a ruling that may overturn Roe v. Wade. Mayer published a pathetic “hit” piece last week on Ginni Thomas, a long-time conservative activist and the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas. It’s a dud.

Mayer’s article, titled “Ginni Thomas’ Crusades: Is Ginni Thomas a threat to the Supreme Court?” is full of falsehoods and distortions, consistent with the malicious and error-filled book she co-authored in 1994, “Strange Justice: The Selling of Clarence Thomas.” Weaving together a mishmash of facts, conspiracies, and comments from dial-them-up liberal judicial ethics “experts,” Mayer argues that Ginni Thomas’ political activities and public comments on issues that come before the court require Justice Thomas to recuse himself from those cases.

But Mayer does not really care about judicial ethics. Rather, she wants to construct a case where only Ginni Thomas has to stop her political activity or Justice Thomas has to recuse himself. She invents a new “recusal” standard that liberal judges don’t follow and misrepresents what other judges in fact do in facing the same situation as the Thomases. Call it Jane Mayer’s version of feminism in 2022: conservative women can’t speak out on issues when their husbands are judges.

Judges Don’t Recuse Over Their Spouse’s Views
The relevant law requires a judge to recuse from a case “if his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” (28 U.S.C. 455(a)). Another provision requires a recusal if the judge knows that a family member has an “interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding” (28 U.S.C. 455(b)(5)(iii). Based on the law, standards, and past precedents, Ginni Thomas’s political and public policy activities have never in a single instance required Justice Thomas to recuse himself from a case.

*  *  *

Source:  https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/24/the-new-yorker-lies-again-in-hit-on-clarence-thomas-and-wife-that-falsely-claims-he-attended-a-dc-event/