Judging Freedom - What Nonsense - AOC calling on Clarence Thomas to Resign

Episode Date: March 29, 2022

#AOC #ClarenceThomas #SupremeCourtSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This new year, why not let Audible expand your life by listening? Audible CA contains over 890,000 total titles within its current library, including audiobooks, podcasts, and exclusive Audible Originals that'll inspire and motivate you. Tap into your well-being with advice and insight from leading professionals and experts on better health, relationships, career, finance, investing, and more. Maybe you want to kick a bad habit or start a good one. If you're looking to encourage positive change in your life one day and challenge at a time, look no further than Tabitha Brown's I Did a New Thing, 30 Days to Living Free. In the audiobook, Tab shares her own stories and those of others alongside

gentle guidance and encouragement to create these incredible changes for yourself and see what good can come from them. Trust me, listening on Audible can help you reach the goals you set for yourself. Start listening today when you sign up for a free 30-day trial at audible.com slash wonderyca. That's audible.com slash wonderyca. That's audible.com slash wonderyca. Hello there, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, March 29th, 2022. It's about 2.40 in the afternoon here in the East Coast of the United States.

This story is almost too ridiculous to mention, but I call it to your attention because it involves the Supreme Court of the United States. And unfortunately, you're probably going to hear more and more of this as time moves on. But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, commonly called AOC, pretty much the leader of the progressives among the Democrats in the House of Representatives, I don't know if there's any Republican progressives, but anyway, she leads a gaggle of Democrat progressives in the House of Representatives, has called upon Justice Clarence Thomas to resign and has threatened to commence impeachment proceedings against him because of his wife's political activities on January 6th.

Now, you talk about punishing A because of what B did. This is really ridiculous. Justice Thomas has not ruled on any cases involving January 6th. Many of them are on their way toward the Supreme Court, and it's up to him as to what he wants to do. Normally, if the spouse of a judge was actively involved in a political movement, and that political movement, for better or for worse, had some of its members before the court, the judge would recuse himself and it would go to another judge. That's pretty much the rule in state courts and in federal district courts and

federal circuit courts. That's the federal trial court and the federal intermediate appellate court. But there are no such rules for the Supreme Court. The ethics rules that apply to every judge and justice in the country do not apply to the nine justices of the Supreme Court. Suppose Mrs. Thomas's acts were under scrutiny by the Supreme Court. Could the other eight justices exclude Justice Thomas? No, there is no provision for this exclusion. This has caused some hard left members of the House of Representatives to say he should resign or be impeached. Well, he shouldn't resign and he can't be impeached. He hasn't done anything wrong. The issue has not yet come to him as to whether or not he needs to recuse himself. It's also unclear if he needs to recuse himself just because Mrs. Thomas may support one side or the other.

All of this remains to be seen as to how it's going to play out. The president is in a lot of hot water over January 6th because of what we discussed yesterday on judging freedom. A federal judge in California ruled that he probably, meaning it is more likely than not, meaning there's more than 51% of proof there, violated the law by encouraging the mob to do whatever it did and by his conspiring with his lawyers. The judge found the conspiring was in fact unlawful and therefore there's no attorney client privilege. I don't know where that's going to go. That may end up before the Supreme Court. Should Justice Thomas recuse himself on that just because his wife silently or publicly was rooting for the president? That's for Justice Thomas to decide, not for AOC and her buddies in the House. Like and subscribe if you like what we do. I hope you like all of our new cameras and lighting. We're getting a lot of positive feedback from all of you. Hey, anything that can make me look younger.

Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.