Supreme Court Justices (Clarence Thomas) Wife Tea Party Organizer

[dabrockster]

I was surprised to see this article on a Supreme court's wife getting involved in Politics this partisan while her husband is a sitting judge on the most powerful court in the land..

Has there been any other such example?

Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,6505384.story

[Jacob]

First question: The Tea Party is not actually a party, thus cannot be partisan, no?
Or do you simply mean involved in politics.

I think there are many such examples. Not so much of wives, but of justices themselves. And by involvement in politics, I mean writing opinions based on party affiliation or political ideology.

[beefytee]

First question: The Tea Party is not actually a party, thus cannot be partisan, no?
Or do you simply mean involved in politics.

I think there are many such examples. Not so much of wives, but of justices themselves. And by involvement in politics, I mean writing opinions based on party affiliation or political ideology.

It's called a tea party, why can't it be considered partisan?

Looking at the definition of partisan, it seems to apply to this group anyway:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/partisan

[Hallelujah]

I was surprised to see this article on a Supreme court's wife getting involved in Politics this partisan while her husband is a sitting judge on the most powerful court in the land..

Has there been any other such example?

Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,6505384.story

I was even more surprised to see our fearless leader run his smack on the Supreme Court during his state of the union. That has NEVER been done. But don't ever yell out 'liar' if you are a Republican congressman.

[Hallelujah]

First question: The Tea Party is not actually a party, thus cannot be partisan, no?
Or do you simply mean involved in politics.

I think there are many such examples. Not so much of wives, but of justices themselves. And by involvement in politics, I mean writing opinions based on party affiliation or political ideology.

You can almost always predict which justices will vote on specific political / societal issues. How could they read the same law and listen to the same evidence and come to different conclusions. Reason, ideology.

[Jacob]

I was surprised to see this article on a Supreme court's wife getting involved in Politics this partisan while her husband is a sitting judge on the most powerful court in the land..

Has there been any other such example?

Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,6505384.story

Here's an example:

Ramona Ripston's is executive director of the ACLU of Southern California.

In fact, the LA Times just wrote an article about how great a woman she is and yet:

"When finally we reach the end of the puff piece, readers are informed that Ms. Ripston has for the last 20 years been married to Judge Stephen Reinhardt, perhaps the most leftist jurist on the nation's most leftist federal court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Do we get any LATimes handwringing about whether Ms. Ripston's crusades for "social justice" undermine Judge Reinhardt's adjudicating and thus taint the Ninth Circuit generally? Surely you jest. We learn it's no big deal: He just recuses himself whenever the ACLU is involved in a case. In fact, far from grave concern, the newspaper sees the conflict as occasion for a good laugh: "They always ask me," Reinhardt jokes, "why couldn't I have married one of those conservatives and taken that vote away." (Emphasis in original.) What a riot!"

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...U2NjdkMzFmNmE=

[dabrockster]

First question: The Tea Party is not actually a party, thus cannot be partisan, no?
Or do you simply mean involved in politics.

I think there are many such examples. Not so much of wives, but of justices themselves. And by involvement in politics, I mean writing opinions based on party affiliation or political ideology.

They may not be a official party, but I am pretty sure they are a partisan group.


What is more interesting was the light shone on the salary she may receive from this position and the conflict of interest that may be there for Clarence Thomas. For example, you could say he could of possibly been swayed one way knowing his wife was about to create this group and will receive large donations from corporations etc for this coming elections (I still see no issue with this since both parties do this a lot)..

I am curious about the other side of this. The women on the SCOTUS. What do their husbands do?

[Moliere]

I was surprised to see this article on a Supreme court's wife getting involved in Politics this partisan while her husband is a sitting judge on the most powerful court in the land..

Has there been any other such example?

Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,6505384.story

To expect her to recluse herself to a knitting group for the reminder of her days is just idiotic. I see no reason why she can't be affiliated and active in politics as long as her husband is not ruling on cases in which she has a direct or indirect financial interest.

[Lost Student]

First question: The Tea Party is not actually a party, thus cannot be partisan, no?
Or do you simply mean involved in politics.

I think there are many such examples. Not so much of wives, but of justices themselves. And by involvement in politics, I mean writing opinions based on party affiliation or political ideology.

"Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic. The The Tea Party is neither tea nor a party. Discuss."

[old_gregg]

clarence thomas is an asshole, and it's not surprising that his wife is vapid and uncouth.

[Jacob]

clarence thomas is an asshole, and it's not surprising that his wife is vapid and uncouth.

Hello pot.

[old_gregg]

Hello pot.

...?

[dabrockster]

To expect her to recluse herself to a knitting group for the reminder of her days is just idiotic. I see no reason why she can't be affiliated and active in politics as long as her husband is not ruling on cases in which she has a direct or indirect financial interest.

First, I think it is cool that she is out there being active. I have no issues with it at all. I just found the whole topic interesting. I think Thomas reclusing himself on such topics is ideal, but looking back it is interesting that she is starting this group "after" the ruling from the SCOTUS on raising funds for political parties. I wonder if they knew of this and if there was a conflict of interest there? I don't think so because there is equal ground for all to do the same thing on all party sides.. So his ruling had no effect on his decision (but I may be looking at this to small)..

[Hallelujah]

clarence thomas is an asshole, and it's not surprising that his wife is vapid and uncouth.

That's what many Americans think of Obama. So Clarence is in good company.

[old_gregg]

That's what many Americans think of Obama. So Clarence is in good company.

so... here's the thing. if i say person 1 is x, but you say person 2 is x, that doesn't make person 1 not x. just a helpful tip for future reference.