Clarence Thomas Doesn't Have To Recuse Himself From Certain Cases According To The Recusal Statute

Democrats want Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from certain cases and the media are backing this narrative.

[MMAfighter]

Thanks for the facts. As far as I’m concerned, Justice Thomas is not responsible for what his wife says or does.

[mrpreparedallthetime]

Hell no! Clearance Thomas is a great Supreme Court justice!

[LogoLamont]

They’re just racist and want to remove Thomas because he’s a black man.

[Michael-ibxi]

Now that's facts thanks for calling them out

[nateg]

You read the three scenarios in the statute that decide whether a judge should recuse themselves. Many people would say the case in question violates the third scenario. I agree that RBG probably violated the second scenario, but that doesn't mean you throw away the recusal statute altogether and never apply it again. I get it, Democrats are being hypocritical, but we should start following the laws and stop using the "Well they do it too" excuse.