The lawyer for Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, said the conservative activist has “serious concerns” about testifying before the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 riot at the US Capitol.
Mark Paoletta sent an eight-page letter, obtained by The Daily Caller, to the committee as it has sought her testimony. Mr Paoletta specifically cited how Supreme Court Justices have been subjected to threats after a draft opinion of the court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
“I would also note that this has been a particularly stressful time as the Thomases have been subjected to an avalanche of death threats and other abuse by the unprecedented assault on the conservative Supreme Court Justices and their families”, the letter said.
Ms Thomas’s actions have come under the purview of the Select Committee amid multiple news stories about her efforts to undermine the 2020 presidential election results.
The Washington Post and CBS News reported how she sent multiple text messages to then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows about overturning the election results and had mass-emailed 29 Arizona legislators to overturn former president Donald Trump’s loss in the state. But Mr Paoletta said the texts were “extremely unremarkable.”
“She was simply texting with a friend”, he wrote.
The Post also reported that she communicated with Trump attorney John Eastman, a former clerk for her husband who hatched the plan for former vice president Mike Pence to block the certification of the presidential election results.
Unlike many spouses of Supreme Court Justices, Ms Thomas is a prominent conservative activist who has been active in right-wing circles in Washington for decades.
Ms Thomas previously said she was “looking forward” to testifying.
“I can’t wait to clear up misconceptions. I look forward to talking to them”, she told Shelby Talcott, a reporter for conservative news outlet The Daily Caller.
Mr Paoletta said that the committee needed better justificiation of its aims before his client testified.
“As she has already indicated, Mrs. Thomas is eager to clear her name and is willing to appear before the Committee to do so”,” he wrote. “However, based on my understanding of the communications that spurred the Committee’s request, I do not understand the need to speak with Mrs. Thomas.”
Mr Paoletta noted how the committee sought Ms Thomas’s testimony because she invited Mr Eastman to speak to a group of activists, but said the invite was not as significant as it appeared.
“An invitation from Mrs. Thomas is an invitation to speak, and nothing more”, he said. “It is not an endorsement of the speaker’s views, nor is it any indication of a working relationship between the speaker and Mrs. Thomas. In fact, Mrs. Thomas often does not share the views of those invited leaders or activists.”
