October 20, 2010 by staff
Virginia Thomas, Virginia Thomas, Lady of Supreme Court Clarence Thomas, calling for the repeal of President Barack Obama “law unconstitutional” health insurance regulation, an issue that may be decided by the High Court.
“With the United States Constitution on our side and the hearts and minds of the American people with us, freedom will prevail,” said a position paper on the website of Liberty plant, the group formed by Virginia Thomas earlier this year to promote conservative principles and candidates.
Justice Thomas, a staunch Conservative, could provide a key vote to invalidate the law.
Virginia Thomas, who goes by Ginni, made headlines on Tuesday when she admitted she had recently called Anita Hill, seeking an apology from the woman who almost 20 years ago accused her husband of making sexually inappropriate comments in the workplace. Hill, who received a message on his answering Thomas Force, said that no excuses would be provided.
But Virginia Thomas has had to face many tests before they reached out to his former accuser of justice. A longtime conservative activist in Washington, Thomas has recently raised its profile and become a regular speaker at the “tea party” gatherings and conferences-conservative movement, as she promotes her new online project.
Thomas’s commitment in partisan politics through Liberty Central is unprecedented for a spouse of a judge of the Supreme Court, lawyers say. Donors that are not disclosed to the public, fueling fears that private donors could fund secretly Liberty Central to curry favor with her husband, fund his group.
Thomas did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday. In the past, she described her work as separate from her husband and passionately defended his right to express his opinions, a point of legal ethics experts do not refute.
“As a matter of ethics formal legal advice from a spouse on a constitutional issue, even if widely disseminated, does not require disqualification of a judge,” said Northwestern University law professor Steven Lubet. “His wisdom or the decision is not something I can comment.”
However, Stephen Gillers, a legal ethicist at New York University, said Virginia Thomas advocacy threaten to tarnish the appearance of impartiality of the court.
“I had hoped for self-restraint more respect for the court. It undermines the institution,” he said. “But this is only my concern. The rules do not stop it. Ms. Thomas has a First Amendment right to take a leading position in public on any legal or political issue it chooses. The conflict and the rules governing the disqualification of Judge Thomas, not his wife. ”
Gillers said he was also concerned by a report that the justices Thomas and Antonin Scalia were featured speakers during private meetings held by billionaire Charles and David Koch, rich tea party supporters. ThinkProgress website published a memo calling on the Koch brothers and wealthy conservatives for a private meeting in Palm Springs, Calif., Jan. 30. The invitation noted that Scalia and Thomas had appeared in the past.
“At the very least Koch should not use their name to increase attendance,” said Gillers.
In speeches and interviews, Virginia Thomas repeatedly called for the repeal of “Obamacare,” which argued its site requires binding rules for doctors.
“Never before has the federal government dictates how physicians treat patients with private insurance, except for specific issues such as drug safety. The Constitution does not allow it,” said a post signed by Liberty Central Editor Brian Faughnan.
Liberty Central has signed a coalition of conservative groups that the removal rate invoice health cares his top priority.
Website links to another Liberty Central website that lists the many legal challenges to the law. He expressed his support for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who brought one of the greatest legal challenges. It is likely that the Supreme Court will ultimately decide the constitutionality of the law.
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.