Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus wrote that Ginni Thomas, the spouse of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has the right to pursue her own career (“Ginni Thomas one reason why SCOTUS needs an ethics code,” Star-Advertiser, Sept. 11). But Marcus does not practice what she preaches. She goes on to suggest Thomas should not be permitted to engage in advocacy related to reform of the Supreme Court, at least not without meeting disclosure requirements of her own.

If Marcus were writing about the spouse of a left-wing justice who was criticizing the direction of the court, would she raise a similar objection? Marcus does not say, but I doubt it.

It is troubling that ideologues such as Marcus object to women participating in political activities when those women express different views from her own. Marcus’ column reflects a disturbing trend among some toward suppressing views seen as antithetical to their own.

Michael Kappos

Waikiki

>> Contact: 529-4831 (phone), letters@staradvertiser.com, staradvertiser.com/editorial/submit-letter