Opinion of Clarence Thomas

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

At least he's not Stop-the-Steal Sam.

[Cokeland Saxton]

Mega HP. A creep, a liar, a traitor, corrupt to the max, and a huge hypocrite

[ingemann]

The worst part of Bush winning in 1988.

This. Anyone who thinks Poppy was a harmless moderate need look no farther than his longest-lasting legacy: this joke of a man who is unquestionably the worst person to sit on the Supreme Court in a long time.

If people demand that a Republican president have to find a Black guy to fill the position, they shouldn’t complain about the quality of that Black guy. Most Black Republicans are a bunch of lunatics, weirdos or grifters, and people who can fill the position as Supreme Court Judge without it being a complete joke are also pretty limited, so the Venn diagram of Black Republican Lawyer who you can expect to stay loyal to the cause is incredible limited.

[Ancestral Republican]

At least he's not Stop-the-Steal Sam.

Is being married to and facilitating the female version of Stop-the-Steal Sam much better?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Clarence Thomas likely was chosen in part for racial reasons. KJB explicitly was. But they both seem to me very capable for their positions. VP Kamala is another story.

[DaleCooper]

One of the nine worst people currently in government.

[Ancestral Republican]

Clarence Thomas likely was chosen in part for racial reasons. KJB explicitly was. But they both seem to me very capable for their positions. VP Kamala is another story.

What evidence is there that he's capable besides aligning with your right wing hackery?

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

HP. One of the worst SCOTUS justices of all time.

[Sumner 1868]

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Clarence Thomas likely was chosen in part for racial reasons. KJB explicitly was. But they both seem to me very capable for their positions. VP Kamala is another story.

What evidence is there that he's capable besides aligning with your right wing hackery?

For some reason, many assume that Supreme Court justices by virtue of their position must be basically competent and erudite people, even though the body has gone through multiple lengthy periods of being a complete joke decades or centuries before the current one. (The man whose record for length of service Thomas will likely beat, William O. Douglas, provides an eerie mirror-image of Thomas and Alito's undisguised hackery, only for the left rather than the right, and he was appointed in 1939; before the Civil War you have cases like Dred Scott and Prigg whose majorities read like they were written by Guillermo Del Toro villains, and the author of the latter, Joseph Story, is still highly regarded by people who start from the axiom that Supreme Court justices know what they are talking about.)

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Clarence Thomas likely was chosen in part for racial reasons. KJB explicitly was. But they both seem to me very capable for their positions. VP Kamala is another story.

What evidence is there that he's capable besides aligning with your right wing hackery?

For some reason, many assume that Supreme Court justices by virtue of their position must be basically competent and erudite people, even though the body has gone through multiple lengthy periods of being a complete joke decades or centuries before the current one. (The man whose record for length of service Thomas will likely beat, William O. Douglas, provides an eerie mirror-image of Thomas and Alito's undisguised hackery, only for the left rather than the right, and he was appointed in 1939; before the Civil War you have cases like Dred Scott and Prigg whose majorities read like they were written by Guillermo Del Toro villains, and the author of the latter, Joseph Story, is still highly regarded by people who start from the axiom that Supreme Court justices know what they are talking about.)

Thomas' capabilities come through most in his skillful use of history in his arguments.

I don't think there's any Justice who served for a long time who has a record without some real misses. Story still deserves to be highly regarded overall. He's one of our great commentators on the Constitution. As wrong as Prigg was, the slave states were unhappy with it, leading to demand for the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Story's opinion, unlike Taney's concurrence, declared officials in free states are not compelled to actively cooperate in enforcement.

[MarkD]

To me, he's just another Supreme Court mediocrity -- correct many times but incorrect too many other times. I don't think he is truly an originalist. His vote in Bush v. Gore and the dissenting opinion he wrote in the term limits case in 1996 were both too far removed from originalism for me to think of him as an originalist. And yes, the fact that he was a black man opposed to affirmative action was the primary reason he was chosen for appointment to the Supreme Court.