Ginni Thomas is at it again. We’ve long known that she helped gin up Trump’s Big Lie about the 2020 election being stolen. But now we find out that Ginni Thomas actually attended the January 6th “stop-the-steal” rally near the White House – you know, the one where Trump fired up a violent crowd and sent them to attack the Capitol building to stop President Biden from being certified the winner?

 

 

Hank has been sounding the alarm over the conflict of interest that Ginni Thomas creates for a while now. Being a paid consultant to right-wing groups that have a stake in issues decided by the Supreme Court means that she has a direct financial interest in the outcome of those cases. That means that her husband – Justice Clarence Thomas – also has a direct financial interest in the outcome.

 

The federal judiciary should be a bastion of impartiality and fairness, not a bastion where one has to pay to play. Make a contribution today to help Hank fight back against injustice on the bench >>

Did Justice Thomas do the right thing and recuse himself in the cases where his wife had a stake in the outcome? No. Instead, he signaled to everyone that he has no problem using his position on the nation’s highest court to benefit himself and his wife.

 

Clarence Thomas even had the audacity to enlist the services of Leonard Leo in promoting Thomas’ book. Leo is the former head of the Federalist Society, the right-wing group intent on filling the judiciary with ultraconservative judges and justices. Leo has made a career out of funneling dark money into propping up conservative causes before the Supreme Court. And Clarence Thomas has proven himself to be perhaps the most conservative justice on the Court. Then Clarence Thomas hired Leo to do his public relations messaging? What!?

 

But here’s the catch. Justice Thomas is not technically doing anything unethical by enriching the family income through conservative lobbyists or by not recusing himself when his wife has a direct financial stake in a case. That’s because the Supreme Court has no code of ethics or conduct it’s required to follow. What he’s doing is sketchy at best, and it’s damaging to our courts and our democracy. But it’s technically allowed.

 

That’s why we need the Supreme Court Ethics Act, which Hank has introduced to bring accountability to the Supreme Court by creating and enforcing a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices. Will you stand with Hank to hold people like Clarence and Ginni Thomas accountable?