House Democrats Call on Justice Clarence Thomas to Recuse Himself From Trump Case
Several House Democrats have called on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from the case involving whether former President Donald Trump is immune from prosecution.
In a letter sent to Justice Thomas, the group of Democrats, which included Reps. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), wrote that they “strongly implore [him] to exercise [his] discretion and recuse [himself] from this and any other decisions in the case of United States v. Trump.”
The letter added that “if you want to show the American people that the Supreme Court’s recent Code of Conduct is worth more than the paper it is written on, you must do the honorable thing and recuse yourself from any decisions in the case.”
Senate Democrats sent a similar letter to Justice Thomas last week, making related demands, highlighting growing pressure on the justice.
The lawmakers raised concerns about the impartiality requirement for justices outlined in the Supreme Court’s ethics code. They claimed that Justice Thomas’s wife, Ginni, is heavily involved in Republican political circles and attended a Trump rally after the 2020 election.
In addition to the letters from Democrats, special counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to determine “whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin.”
The court agreed to take up the case, setting a Dec. 20 deadline for President Trump’s attorneys to respond.
The case in question is appealing a federal judge’s ruling this month rejecting the former president’s bid to dismiss the case, based on an argument that he could not be prosecuted for official actions he took as president.
President Trump’s attorneys argue that subjecting former presidents to criminal prosecution for conduct related to their official responsibilities would weaken the presidency. However, a federal judge in his election case, Tanya Chutkan, dismissed that argument and claimed it would give former presidents a “lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.”
After the Supreme Court decided to take up the special counsel’s petition, Judge Chutkan last week halted all activity related to the election case.
The Supreme Court and Justice Thomas did not issue public statements on the letters from Democrats, and they have not indicated whether he plans to recuse himself from the case. There is mounting anticipation for a response from the embattled Supreme Court Justice as the situaiton unfolds.
