Talk:Ginni Thomas

Reference to Ginni Thomas as an attorney

It is not clear that Ginni Thomas passed any state’s bar exam. Generally, if you have not passed a state bar exam you are prohibited from engaging in the practice of law (a definition which is nuanced from jurisdiction to jurisdiction). In addition, not only can you not practice law, you may not hold yourself out as a professional who can engage in the practice of law – even if you are working in a non-legal profession, as doing so could trigger legal ethics violations. So calling yourself a “lawyer” to others or listing your J.D. degree on websites/marketing materials/social media without a disclaimer that you have not yet passed a state bar exam may be an ethical violation. Even casual contexts can run afoul of the current ABA technicalities involving this issue. So individuals should refrain from using the title lawyer altogether. An individual also may not use the title of “attorney” when referring to oneself in any context without having passed a state bar exam. Thus Wikipedia should not refer to Ginni Thomas as an “attorney” activist. 2601:194:4100:81B0:9809:DC91:BAB2:A7F6 (talk) 02:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

She is an attorney. She has a law degree. According to the article she worked as an attorney for the US Chamber of Commerce, and in the Legislative Affairs office of the US Department of Labor, during which time she argued cases in court. It isn’t necessary to be in currently active practice to be called an attorney. -- MelanieN (talk) 14:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is incorrect. An attorney is a licensed profession in the United States and the license must be renewed yearly. It is entirely possible that she has maintained her license for decades without using it, but it's extremely unlikely, and I can find no evidence this is the case. Referring to her as an attorney is misleading at best; she does not practice law currently. "Former attorney" would at least be accurate.72.204.54.180 (talk) 17:17, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2022

Change "avoid politics" to "avoid publicly commenting on politics". It's impossible to be the spouse of a Supreme Court member and not have political philosophies - since your lifestyle would either be mutual with that of your spouse or against it - both of which are conscious political decisions. 92.10.13.209 (talk) 19:13, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: While I agree with you in principle, the quote from the article is "Thomas’s political commentary has made her a controversial figure; most Supreme Court spouses stay out of politics." which is pretty much the way the sentence is worded, just without plagiarizing it directly. Fbifriday (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

@User:Fbifriday does the phrase 'avoid political careers' seem like a good alternative? Stephanie921 (talk) 00:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

To add to article

Basic information to add to this article: in the sentence reading "The committee interviewed her on September 29," please add that she was not under oath during this interview. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Not an attorney

Following up on someone else's comment from eight months ago that had not received a response:

Ginni Thomas is not an attorney just because she went to law school, and I can find no evidence she is currently licensed to practice law. Law licenses generally must be renewed yearly, and it is very unlikely that someone who went to law school 50 years ago and has never practiced law in her life would be keeping up with annual licensing all that time.

Please edit the lede to remove the "attorney" language or link a source that identifies her as an attorney. 72.204.54.180 (talk) 17:10, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Conservative activist -> far-right activist (sourced)

Currently, the lede simply refers to Ginni Thomas as a "conservative activist". RS are referring to Ginni Thomas as a far-right activist. This needs to be reflected in this article, as it is Wikipedia policy to follow RS in descriptors like these. Please note that I have left out opinion articles and editorials as well as quotations within articles. Please note that all sources I provide are from organizations listed as RS in Wikipedia:Reliable Sources/Perennial sources. I propose "has been described as a conservative and far-right activist" as a new descriptor in the lede to reflect both RS describing her as a conservative activist, and RS describing her as a far-right activist.

Small sampling of sources:

- The Guardian: "Thomas is the subject of controversy centering on the activities of his wife, the far-right activist Ginni Thomas." (April 2, 2023) https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/02/supreme-court-justices-tricked-trump-kavanaugh-book-biskupic-cnn. Also: "Ginni Thomas is an activist with deep ties on the Republican far right." (May 20, 2022): https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/20/ginni-thomas-2020-election-arizona-emails

- Le Monde (Paywall): describes the group Groundswell which she founded as "a true platform for the far right" (June 6, 2022): https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2022/06/06/ginni-thomas-the-embarrassing-and-powerful-wife-of-a-supreme-court-justice_5985859_4.html

- Vanity Fair: "Ginni Thomas, the justice's far-right spouse" (Sept. 30, 2022) https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/09/clarence-thomas-ginni-thomas-election-law-cases-january-6

Not listed as perennial source, but generally accepted as RS on wiki:

- Business Insider: "Thomas, who was briefly a member of Lifespring — a controversial group that was part of the "human potential movement" — before becoming an anti-cult activist, has surprised many who once knew her by aligning herself with far-right conspiracy theory groups" and "Now, she has more deeply embedded herself in the political sphere, spewing far-right rhetoric and conspiracy theories typically supporting Trump." (July 24, 2022) https://www.businessinsider.com/ex-cult-member-ginni-thomas-indulging-far-right-conspiracies-2022-6?international=true&r=US&IR=T

82.176.221.176 (talk) 05:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

No. Those are poor sources to even support the claim that she is called far right much less to support any addition to the lead. Of those sources only The Guiardian, a source with a clear left bias, called her far-right buried in the article. The article about her didn't call her far-right. This comes off as label pushing vs describing the subject impartially. Springee (talk) 11:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Your opinion on The Guardian isn't relevant for is as a source. If you question its reliability, you can bring that up on the source noticeboard, not here. Cortador (talk) 15:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Cortador, you are now edit warring on a BLP in a contentious topic. I recommend that you self-revert and allow for a full discussion. Two editors wanting to include something is not a consensus. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Springee. Marquardtika (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

• Wehner, Peter (March 30, 2022). "Ginni Thomas's Texts Are a Barometer for the Far Right". It was, by any measure, an extraordinary and unsettling set of exchanges. President Donald Trump's chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and the right-wing political activist Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, texted each other at least 29 times in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election. Their purpose was not to lament the result; it was to encourage efforts to overturn it. That would be worrisome enough, but what makes it doubly so is the arguments invoked, the sources cited, and the mindset revealed in these raw, unfiltered texts. They are a window into a very distorted, very disturbed world. A world of true believers. And a world that has largely influenced and defined the American right during the Trump era.

To be clear, barometer is defined as Anything used as a gauge or indicator. I don't see a shortage of sources that link her to the "far-right". —Locke Cole • t • c 16:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

"Linked to" is not the same as "is far-right" in attributed voice or, even worse, Wikipedia voice. Also, headlines aren't RSs. Springee (talk) 16:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The Atlantic source you link to is not titled "Ginni Thomas's Texts Are a Barometer for the Far Right." It is titled "A Glimpse Into a Fearful, Angry, Imaginary World: Ginni Thomas's texts offer a window into a dark and conspiratorial mindset." And "far-right" isn't seen anywhere in the article. The article describes her as "a right-wing political activist." "Far right" and "right wing" are not the same, and each is a sub-set of "conservatism" anyway. Most sources describe her as a "conservative activist". See PBS, NPR, Washington Post, ABC, etc. Marquardtika (talk) 16:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

False dichotomy - she can be both. Cortador (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

In reader view, the title of the article is Ginni Thomas’s Texts Are a Barometer for the Far Right. I have no idea why it shows a different title for the paywalled view. —Locke Cole • t • c 02:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)