The Ginni Thomas Text Message Controversy Explained

One of the goals of Trump's various allies was to try to get the election settled by the Supreme Court, which Trump has been vocal about. https://t.co/CdGeSt2Em4

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) March 24, 2022

And about that controversy:

Wouldn't this be a nice time for United States Supreme Court justices to be bound by a code of ethics?

Of course it's also a time to remember that "during good behavior" means whatever Congress decides it does.

— NOHat (@Popehat) March 24, 2022

But if Congress tries to impose and, more importantly enforce, a code of ethics, that would endanger the independence of the judiciary. Or do the judiciary would insist, and then declare the law unconstitutional. Which, yes, would set up a constitutional crisis. The only oversight allowed is impeachment, and that’s just because it’s already baked into the pie.

And apparently Q-Anon is not a symptom of economic anxiety:

This is a real text that Ginni Thomas sent to Mark Meadows, shortly after the 2020 election. pic.twitter.com/JHooG5DyZI

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) March 24, 2022

It’s just a symptom of insanity. Seriously. Completely off the planet.

The wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice told Trump’s chief of staff that Biden and his family would face military tribunals at Guantanamo for “ballot fraud.” https://t.co/Nyf2q1T9mo pic.twitter.com/G0OUzxvFAz

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) March 24, 2022

And there’s the other problem:

I am just making it clear that THESE texts.. between Ginni Thomas and Mark Meadows are likely not part of the documents that Justice Thomas ruled should not be released to the committee. (6)
-end-

— Ryan Nobles (@ryanobles) March 24, 2022

However, opinions differ:

So, @TheNewYorker reported, instead of recusing, Clarence Thomas was the only vote to block the Jan6 committee from getting Trump's papers. Mark Meadows filed a supporting brief. And Ginni's texts to Meadows were at stake. https://t.co/2oj1rX3DnC via @NewYorker

— Jane Mayer (@JaneMayerNYer) March 24, 2022

Which brings back to who watches the watchers? Or more accurately, who watches the unwatchable? Impeachment is the bluntest of blunt instruments. It will never support even an investigation, much less a removal. 

The wife of a Supreme Court justice appears to have beliefs indistinguishable from a QAnon follower. This is very, very bad. pic.twitter.com/J4g35jTktc

— The Republican Accountability Project (@AccountableGOP) March 25, 2022

Whatever it is, there’s bugger all we can do about it.

Remember the time Ginni Thomas left a nasty message on Anita Hill's phone demanding an apology. That was wild.

— Jeet Heer (@HeerJeet) March 24, 2022

Yes, we’ll always have that. And Paris. We’ll always have Paris, too.