Though it is typically unfair to attribute ideas or qualities of one person to another simply because of their association with each other, a developing story reported on in the LA Times is destined to test the limits of this notion. This is because Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife Virginia has decided to start a decidedly political tea party group.
All Supreme Court Justices, like most Americans, have political leanings. For example, Thomas is noted for being one of the more conservative justices on the court. Additionally, Supreme Court justices are often politically charged appointments by partisan presidents and are voted on by the most political of bodies, the Senate. However, notions of fairness suggest that some minimum level of impartiality be observed by members of the Court. Therefore, though in reality political idealogy and public policy questions are often found being freely discussed in their opinions, Justices are expected to maintain a certain level of non-partisan decorum in public dealings.
What is interesting about the situation at hand is that it is not Thomas' public dealings, but his connection to his wife and therefore her activities that is being questioned. This is due mainly to concerns that this connection may cause at least the appearance, if not the actuality, of conflict in future cases. In truth, there are not likely to be too many cases where this situation leads to claims of even the appearance of impropriety. However, if such a case arises, it will be interesting to see how Thomas handles a potential recusal.
If personal experience serves as any indication, the court probably wouldn't miss much from an absent Thomas during oral arguments; he can most often be observed twirling in his chair and counting ceiling tiles while the lawyers are advocating. However, his consistently conservative vote's absence could certainly shift the balance of the court in potentially explosive cases. On the other hand, he may choose not to recuse himself, potentially leading to claims of unfairness. Either way, the situation has the potential to prove interesting.
Here's my take: Ruth Bader Ginsburg used to be a volunteer lawyer, board member, and general counsel for the ACLU. If her intimate relationship with one of the most radical progressive organizations in the world is apparently ok with the LA Times and other members of the media, why should I care that the wife of a justice started a Tea Party group?????? If the progressive media thinks Justice Thomas should recuse himself from cases - I assume involving issues of taxation and limited government - because of his wife's connection with a Tea Party, then shouldnt Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse herself from any case in which the ACLU is involved in??? I think so. But guess what....she hasn't, and furthermore, no one at the LA Times or any other progressive media source has even brough it up. Kind of interesting.........
ReplyDelete