The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Thursday on whether the 14th Amendment requires former President Donald Trump to be removed from the ballot.

However, some critics have put forward arguments of their own for why Justice Clarence Thomas should be removed from the case.

Leftists say political views of Thomas' wife make his impartiality questionable

According to ABC News, the claim is based on the new ethics code which all nine members of America's highest judicial body signed onto last year.

The code provides that a justice should recuse him or herself under circumstances in which his or her "impartiality might be reasonably questioned."

Should Justice Thomas recuse in 14th Amendment case because of wife's Jan. 6 role? https://t.co/nwZYzBWyyR

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) February 6, 2024

Opponents of Justice Thomas contend that his impartiality is in doubt given how his wife, Ginni Thomas, has long been a vocal Trump supporter.

What's more, Mrs. Thomas also backed the "Stop the Steal" campaign, an effort aimed at preventing certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Left-wing activist ties Mrs. Thomas' support for Trump to January 6 "insurrection"

Among those arguing that Justice Thomas needs to go is Gabe Roth, who serves as executive director of Fix the Court, a left-wing judicial watchdog group.

"Ginni Thomas was a supporter of Donald Trump's, from pretty early on in his campaign, and she has maintained that support even through today," ABC News quoted Roth as saying.

"And those attempts to overturn the election was what led to the insurrection, which is what led to Trump being kicked off the ballot in Colorado," he insisted.

Similar sentiments were expressed by Hofstra University Law School professor and judicial ethics expert James Sample.

Former Thomas clerk dismisses complaints as being politically motivated

"This is the easiest recusal analysis case you could ever imagine," Sample told ABC News. "The question isn't, should Ginni Thomas be allowed or not allowed to engage in political advocacy."

"The question here is, should Clarence Thomas, when Ginni Thomas engages in that political advocacy, be allowed to rule on the legitimacy or illegitimacy of that advocacy," Sample declared.

However, former Thomas clerk and Judicial Crisis Network president Carrie Severino dismissed suggestions that the justice needs to go as being politically motivated.

"I think there are people who would like to see Justice Thomas not deciding this case, and therefore they're going to attack him," Severino asserted, adding that these individuals rely on "conspiracy theories" rather than "what is a reasonable appearance of impropriety."