Ginni Thomas’s texts to Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows on the day of the January 6th domestic terrorist attack on Congress have prompted a House committee to look into potential ethics violations by her husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, TheHill reports.

Texts from Ginni Thomas encouraging Meadows, Donald Trump and others to undermine the Constitution were released last week, leading to questions as to why Clarence Thomas did not recuse himself from a Supreme Court case about turning over Meadows’ communications to the House Select Committee investigating the attack.

While there is no specific requirement for justices to recuse themselves from cases in which they have an apparent conflict of interest, Clarence Thomas should have immediately refused to be part of the panel for cases involving his wife’s communication.  In the case, Clarence Thomas voted to prevent the committee from getting the communications.  His participating in the case–and his vote being the sole one from the court to support hiding the communications from Congress–have raised questions among legal and ethics experts.

A memo from House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Hank Johnson, prepping for Wednesday meeting, contains a summary of ethical rules used by lower courts.  It also contained language about the House authority to impeach judges and others.  “Threats or inquiries of impeachment as a means of regulating the conduct of Supreme Court justices have had varying effects,” the memo said.

Only one Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached:  Justice Samuel Chase was impeached in 1803 for his management of cases when he was on lower courts; he was ultimately acquited.