Ginni Thomas has reportedly conveyed her support for the First Liberty Institute, a religious rights organization that actively opposes proposed reforms to the Supreme Court. This move follows scrutiny over alleged ethical violations associated with her husband, Justice Clarence Thomas. In an email to First Liberty attorney Kelly Shackelford, she expressed gratitude for the organization's efforts, stating that they have empowered "many judges" and thanked them for their work opposing reforms such as term limits and increased ethical regulations for the Supreme Court.

During a private call with donors, Shackelford read Thomas's email aloud, highlighting her claims that the group's activities were crucial in assisting judges who feel politically constrained. Thomas specifically noted her appreciation for their resistance against the Biden administration's reform initiatives, which she believed left many conservatives feeling frustrated and unresponsive. Similarly, Shackelford characterized recent proposals for a new ethics code and other reforms as attempts to undermine the court's independence, criticizing Justice Elena Kagan and promoting skepticism towards the motivations behind such changes.

The backdrop of this conversation involves President Biden's push for reforms following recent controversial Supreme Court decisions. Proposals such as limiting justices' terms and implementing a binding ethics code have intensified debates on judicial conduct and integrity, with protests from organizations like First Liberty emphasizing perceived threats to the judicial system. Ginni Thomas's past actions, particularly her texts urging legislators to challenge 2020 election results, have continued to draw attention to the intertwining of political advocacy and judicial impartiality.

Additionally, the conversation between Shackelford and his group’s supporters reflected broader tensions within the judiciary, exacerbated by external pressures and public scrutiny. As the conversation concluded, participants agreed that the current political climate poses a significant challenge to the independence and credibility of the Supreme Court, with implications that extend to both established practices and ethical responsibilities.