Opinion of Clarence Thomas

[TDAS04]

Very, very bad.

[darklordoftech]

Very, very bad.

[Progressive Pessimist]

The worst part of Bush winning in 1988.

[S019]

Massive HP

[Schiff for Senate]

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.

He's corrupt. He's a brazen hack. He is the biggest reason why the public opinion of our Supreme Court is so low. Most of the corruption, most of the absolute hackery, comes from this man. When he kicks the bucket things will finally improve wrt the Supreme Court.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

[Ancestral Republican]

If Harlan Crow's house was on fire, he'd fight harder to put the fire out than Harlan Crow himself would.

[Dr. Cynic]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

[Schiff for Senate]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

I'm sorry you feel that way but what part exactly of what I said is untrue?

(And please do not use dehumanizing language about people when speaking to me. It does you no service to convince anyone. Thanks)

[Schiff for Senate]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

I'm sorry you feel that way but what part exactly of what I said is untrue?

(And please do not use dehumanizing language about people when speaking to me. It does you no service to convince anyone. Thanks)

The first part - "A great American with a great legal mind."

The rest of what you said is true - he has indeed had quite an influence on the court (mind you, it's an entirely negative one, but it's quite an influence nonetheless), and he did indeed come from humble beginnings.

But characterizing him as being a great American is patently false; attributing a "great legal mind" to him is disingenuous. The idea that everyone on the court is an adroit, respectable legal scholar is wishful thinking; the best we can get while Thomas is on the court is 8/9. He is a clear partisan hack and has completely drifted away from unbiased jurisprudence and into the realm of partisan politics over the course of his years on the court.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

I'm sorry you feel that way but what part exactly of what I said is untrue?

(And please do not use dehumanizing language about people when speaking to me. It does you no service to convince anyone. Thanks)

The first part - "A great American with a great legal mind."

The rest of what you said is true - he has indeed had quite an influence on the court (mind you, it's an entirely negative one, but it's quite an influence nonetheless), and he did indeed come from humble beginnings.

But characterizing him as being a great American is patently false; attributing a "great legal mind" to him is disingenuous. The idea that everyone on the court is an adroit, respectable legal scholar is wishful thinking; the best we can get while Thomas is on the court is 8/9. He is a clear partisan hack and has completely drifted away from unbiased jurisprudence and into the realm of partisan politics over the course of his years on the court.

What legal opinions of his have you read?

[President Johnson]

One of the worst. Massive HP.

Probably the biggest stain on Poppy's legacy. If Marshall just stayed on until his death, which was four days after Bubba's inauguration. But given Anita Hill, it would be irnonic for Biden to name his successor. I don't expect this to happen though, even if he secures as second term.

[Schiff for Senate]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

I'm sorry you feel that way but what part exactly of what I said is untrue?

(And please do not use dehumanizing language about people when speaking to me. It does you no service to convince anyone. Thanks)

The first part - "A great American with a great legal mind."

The rest of what you said is true - he has indeed had quite an influence on the court (mind you, it's an entirely negative one, but it's quite an influence nonetheless), and he did indeed come from humble beginnings.

But characterizing him as being a great American is patently false; attributing a "great legal mind" to him is disingenuous. The idea that everyone on the court is an adroit, respectable legal scholar is wishful thinking; the best we can get while Thomas is on the court is 8/9. He is a clear partisan hack and has completely drifted away from unbiased jurisprudence and into the realm of partisan politics over the course of his years on the court.

What legal opinions of his have you read?

I won't pretend that I've fully read his (or any other justice's) legal opinions in any case; I'm not (yet) a law student and haven't had the impetus to do so. I did read portions of the opinions in cases such as Dobbs, McDonald, Heller.

But because I'm not a legal scholar, I wouldn't make these comments that I've made about Thomas, to any other justice - be it Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Roberts, or Gorsuch. By and large I'm a liberal; they're conservatives; and I tend to disagree with their decisions. Yet again, precisely because I have not actually fully read their opinions, it would be futile for me to attack them on legal grounds. They are better researched, better familiar with the Constitution and legal precedent, and it'd be petulant for me to argue against their legal reasoning until I myself acquire more knowledge about these things.

Likewise, for the most part I'd refrain from criticizing Thomas' legal opinions per se. What I am criticizing more is conduct of this that is contemptible no matter how much you might agree or disagree with his rulings.

a.) He refused to recuse himself from 1/6 cases despite a clear conflict of interest - his literal other half was involved in election conspiracies. That was clearly improper and, much like Jeff Sessions did as AG in 2017, he should've had the integrity to recuse himself from those cases.

b.) When it comes to SCOTUS justices receiving "gifts," I wouldn't say that that's inherently wrong, but there must exist a limit where donations and gifts can arguably become bribes, particularly when the justice in question tends to then support the donor in SCOTUS cases. It's no different from congressional lobbying; the difference is that (I think) we ought to have a higher standard for SCOTUS justices, given that individual justices hold much more power than your average member of Congress, and that they are meant to be above partisan politics. Now, based on recent findings, it's clear that Thomas is receiving the vast majority of such donations - that too from a Republican megadonor. Harlan Crow claims that he is just good friends with the Thomases, but one would have to be incredibly naive not to detect at least a whiff of corruption when they read the report and discover just how generous Crow's "gifts" and donations have been.

The problems with Thomas go much deeper than just these two particular red flags, but I think they provide a good look into why I can express such hatred for Thomas in particular, even without having fully read his legal opinions. It has less to do with the legal philosophy (which I also almost always disagree with, but that's not the point) and much more to do with the personal and moral conduct of the person in question. What he has done, time and time again, is improper for any justice, no matter how much you may agree with their rulings.

[Ferguson97]

Unbearable, narcissistic, corrupt, liar, evil, traitor, obstructive, and malicious.

[CumbrianLefty]

Unbearable, narcissistic, corrupt, liar, evil, traitor, obstructive, and malicious.

But apart from that......he is OK?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

I'm sorry you feel that way but what part exactly of what I said is untrue?

(And please do not use dehumanizing language about people when speaking to me. It does you no service to convince anyone. Thanks)

The first part - "A great American with a great legal mind."

The rest of what you said is true - he has indeed had quite an influence on the court (mind you, it's an entirely negative one, but it's quite an influence nonetheless), and he did indeed come from humble beginnings.

But characterizing him as being a great American is patently false; attributing a "great legal mind" to him is disingenuous. The idea that everyone on the court is an adroit, respectable legal scholar is wishful thinking; the best we can get while Thomas is on the court is 8/9. He is a clear partisan hack and has completely drifted away from unbiased jurisprudence and into the realm of partisan politics over the course of his years on the court.

What legal opinions of his have you read?

I won't pretend that I've fully read his (or any other justice's) legal opinions in any case; I'm not (yet) a law student and haven't had the impetus to do so. I did read portions of the opinions in cases such as Dobbs, McDonald, Heller.

But because I'm not a legal scholar, I wouldn't make these comments that I've made about Thomas, to any other justice - be it Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Roberts, or Gorsuch. By and large I'm a liberal; they're conservatives; and I tend to disagree with their decisions. Yet again, precisely because I have not actually fully read their opinions, it would be futile for me to attack them on legal grounds. They are better researched, better familiar with the Constitution and legal precedent, and it'd be petulant for me to argue against their legal reasoning until I myself acquire more knowledge about these things.

Likewise, for the most part I'd refrain from criticizing Thomas' legal opinions per se. What I am criticizing more is conduct of this that is contemptible no matter how much you might agree or disagree with his rulings.

.....

How can you admit you haven't read hardly anything of his opinions or those of the other justices but then compare him unfavorably to them when it comes to how well researched they are or how they show familiarity with the Constitution

[Sir Mohamed]

Major HP.

A corrupt and morally bankrupt right-wing hacktivist justice through and through. Who possibly is a sexual assaulter as well. Should have left the bench or been impeached yesterday.

That said, there's a good chance he'll either retire under a GOP WH and senate or get carried out the courthouse feet first.

[Schiff for Senate]

A great American and a great legal mind who came from humble beginnings to become an influential member of the highest Court in the land.

He's a corrupt piece of crap. Honestly, I expect this is either sarcastic and/or meant just to troll the libs...if not then I truly do not understand how your mind works.

I can even understand supporting Trump more than I can understand venerating this lowlife who drags the sanctity of the highest of court of the land down to the gutter with him.

I'm sorry you feel that way but what part exactly of what I said is untrue?

(And please do not use dehumanizing language about people when speaking to me. It does you no service to convince anyone. Thanks)

The first part - "A great American with a great legal mind."

The rest of what you said is true - he has indeed had quite an influence on the court (mind you, it's an entirely negative one, but it's quite an influence nonetheless), and he did indeed come from humble beginnings.

But characterizing him as being a great American is patently false; attributing a "great legal mind" to him is disingenuous. The idea that everyone on the court is an adroit, respectable legal scholar is wishful thinking; the best we can get while Thomas is on the court is 8/9. He is a clear partisan hack and has completely drifted away from unbiased jurisprudence and into the realm of partisan politics over the course of his years on the court.

What legal opinions of his have you read?

I won't pretend that I've fully read his (or any other justice's) legal opinions in any case; I'm not (yet) a law student and haven't had the impetus to do so. I did read portions of the opinions in cases such as Dobbs, McDonald, Heller.

But because I'm not a legal scholar, I wouldn't make these comments that I've made about Thomas, to any other justice - be it Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Roberts, or Gorsuch. By and large I'm a liberal; they're conservatives; and I tend to disagree with their decisions. Yet again, precisely because I have not actually fully read their opinions, it would be futile for me to attack them on legal grounds. They are better researched, better familiar with the Constitution and legal precedent, and it'd be petulant for me to argue against their legal reasoning until I myself acquire more knowledge about these things.

Likewise, for the most part I'd refrain from criticizing Thomas' legal opinions per se. What I am criticizing more is conduct of this that is contemptible no matter how much you might agree or disagree with his rulings.

.....

How can you admit you haven't read hardly anything of his opinions or those of the other justices but then compare him unfavorably to them when it comes to how well researched they are or how they show familiarity with the Constitution

OK, so there are multiple different aspects to this. You're strictly considering his ability to interpret the Constitution. In my case, the point I was trying to hammer home is, legal ability be damned (whether he has any, or how much he has, is a separate issue that I won't address until I have more closely researched his opinions), he has failed to meet the bar of ethical conduct that should apply to all justices, whether you agree with none of their opinions or with all of them. He is unique in this failure, and that's why he is so reprehensible to me in a way that none of the other justices on the court can be.

Regarding the exact words you use, to construe them as strictly as Thomas construes the Constitution, I have admittedly not refuted your claim that he is a "great legal mind," because that claim can only be refuted after having read his rulings, opinions, etc. (which, again, I have not yet done). But calling him a "great American," at least, is a claim that can easily be disproven based on his conduct on the court alone (to say nothing of the Anita Hill allegations - which, if true, make it even more abundantly clear that he is a terrible human being).

[Thank you for being a friend...]

I don't care what he says - I believe he indeed did sexually harass Anita Hill.  I believe her testimony over his.  For me, that alone makes him unworthy to be sitting on that court everyday that he's on it.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Mildly better than Alito, because I think he does have some form of principle (even though they are stupid principles), but incredibly bad. SCOTUS is a very bad instiution.

[John Dule]

Smarter than literally everyone on this forum, and correct about the Privileges & Immunities Clause. What's not to like?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Not a fan, but still better than Alito.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

A brazenly corrupt sex predator who at a minimum sexually harassed two women and partisan hack who abuses his office to impose his personal beliefs on the country regardless of what the Constitution says.  

Better than Kavenaugh (who definitely tried to rape one woman and may well have sexually assaulted a second and is thus automatically worse than anyone else on the Court), but worse than Alito and Gorsuch who are both simply corrupt partisan hacks happily abusing their offices to impose their personal views on the country regardless of what the Constitution actually says.  He’s also worse than Roberts, Barrett, and Sotomayor who suck for various less notable reasons.  

The only half-decent judges on the Court right now are Kagan and Jackson (the latter of whom I’ve been unexpectedly quite impressed with).

[Sir Mohamed]

A corrupt sex predator

Funny this description is also spot on with regard to the GOP party leader.