Ginni Thomas supported group working against Supreme Court reform: report
Wife of Supreme Court justice says religious rights group has ‘filled the sails of many judges’
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Ginni Thomas privately shared her support for a religious rights group working against Supreme Court reforms - which were prompted by what many see as her husband’s ethical violations, according to a report by ProPublica.
The wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote an email to attorney Kelly Shackelford, who runs the First Liberty Institute, which describes itself as “the largest legal organization in the nation dedicated exclusively to defending religious liberty for all Americans.”
During a private call with the group’s donors on July 31, Shackelford read the email from Thomas aloud. Thomas wrote in all caps: “YOU GUYS HAVE FILLED THE SAILS OF MANY JUDGES. CAN I JUST TELL YOU, THANK YOU SO, SO, SO MUCH.”
Thomas argued that the group’s work opposing suggestions that the court be reformed helped some judges.
According to ProPublica, Shackelford said he viewed Thomas’s support as proof that judges who are unable to “fight” in the “political sphere” were grateful for the group’s work thwarting Supreme Court reform, which includes proposals such as term limits and a code of ethics.
The attorney said a First Liberty employee in Washington, DC, had recently met with Thomas. It was after the meeting Ginni Thomas sent the email.
“I cannot adequately express enough appreciation for you guys pulling into reacting to the Biden effort on the Supreme Court,” she wrote. “Many were so depressed at the lack of response by R’s and conservatives.”
Shackelford referred to Justice Elena Kagan as “somewhat treasonous” and “somewhat disloyal” during the July 31 call following Kagan’s endorsement of efforts to enforce a new Supreme Court ethics code, adding that the rules would “destroy the independence” of the court.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said over the weekend that she was also open to having the code be enforceable.
Following the conversation, the group sent a 45-minute recording of the call to a number of supporters. The recording was subsequently obtained by ProPublica and Documented.
The executive general counsel at First Liberty Institute, Hiram Sasser, told ProPublica in a statement that the group is “extremely alarmed at the Leftist attacks on our democracy and judicial independence.”
Calling it a “dangerous threat,” Sasser went on to say that it’s “shameful that the political left seems perfectly fine destroying democracy to achieve the court decisions they favor instead of working through democratic and constitutional means.”
The Independent has contacted First Liberty for comment and has attempted to reach Ginni Thomas.
The call on July 31 took place not long after President Joe Biden announced his plans for a number of changes to the nation’s highest court.
Biden pushed for term limits, an amendment to reverse the court’s recent decision on presidential immunity as well as a binding ethics code for the justices.
Shackelford said on the call that the proposals, including adding seats to the court, were part of a push to “destroy the court” and that the attempts were spearheaded by progressives and those on the “extreme left,” adding that they were “upset” at the outcome of “a few cases.”
Ginni Thomas has been in headlines since it was revealed she sent a large number of texts after the 2020 election pushing former President Donald Trump’s unfounded allegations of fraud. Writing to then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Thomas claimed that “Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History.” She also argued that Trump shouldn’t concede the election.
Thomas wrote emails to legislators in Arizona and Wisconsin asking them to take on what she claimed were fraudulent results and to send a “clean slate” of new electors. She also wrote that “the nation’s eyes are on you now.”
“Please consider what will happen to the nation we all love if you do not stand up and lead,” she added at the time.
In 2022, Thomas said she regretted the texts she sent to Meadows.
The wife of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Martha-Ann Alito, recently came under fire for flying an upside-down US flag at their home in Virginia. The symbol has been used by those pushing the baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen. The flag was displayed at the home as the court was deciding on whether they would hear a case connected to the 2020 election.
Alito told The New York Times that he wasn’t part of the decision to fly the flag and that his wife did so to respond to “a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs.”
The effort to impose an ethics code on the court came after the revelations that wealthy GOP donors had handed Thomas and Alito gifts and travel experiences that they did not disclose. After the reporting by ProPublica, Thomas changed his disclosure reports and the court adopted its first-ever ethics code.
Both Thomas and Alito have claimed that they didn’t have to disclose gifts and free travel from friends.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments