Misplaced Pages

Clarence Thomas

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WoohooPP (talk | contribs) at 14:46, 2 October 2008 (→Approach to oral arguments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:46, 2 October 2008 by WoohooPP (talk | contribs) (→Approach to oral arguments)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

{{Infobox Judge | name BOLD TESTICLES FROM BEYOND!!!From 1974 to 1977, Thomas was an Assistant Attorney General of Missouri under then State Attorney General John Danforth. When Danforth was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1976 to 1979, Thomas left to become an attorney with Monsanto in St. Louis, Missouri. He returned to work for Danforth from 1979 to 1981 as a Legislative Assistant. Both men shared a common bond in that both had studied to be ordained (although Thomas was Roman Catholic and Danforth was ordained Episcopalian). Danforth was to be instrumental in championing Thomas for the Supreme Court.

In 1981, he joined the Reagan administration. From 1981 to 1982, he served as Assistant Secretary of Education for the Office of Civil Rights in the [[United States Department of HE IS AN ASSHOLIO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!IN HIS PORTFOLIO FOR YOUR BUNGHOLIO!!!!!web|url=http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh102-1084pt4/442-511.pdf%7Ctitle=United States Senate, Transcript of Proceedings|format=pdf|pages=pp. 442-511|accessdate=2008-09-18|date=1991-10-10|publisher=gpoaccess.gov}}</ref> Wright said that Thomas made comments about her and other women's anatomy "quite often." Wright told several senators' staff that Clarence Thomas asked her the size of her breasts. Wright said that after she turned down Thomas for a date, Thomas began to express discontent with her work and eventually fired her. Rose Jourdain said that Wright had spoken to her about Thomas at the original time of the events. Jourdain said that Wright told her of "increasingly aggressive behavior" and Wright's becoming "increasingly upset and increasingly unnerved." Jourdain spoke of Thomas's comments on Wright's bra size and legs, and of how Thomas once "had the nerve" to come to Wright's home.

Another former Thomas assistant, Sukari Hardnett, made further damaging charges against him. Although Hardnett made it clear she was not accusing Thomas of sexual harassment, she provided the Judiciary Committee with sworn testimony that "if you were young, black, female, reasonably attractive and worked directly for Clarence Thomas, you knew full well you were being inspected and auditioned as a female." Additionally, Ellen Wells, John W. Carr, Judge Susan Hoerchner, and Joel Paul testified that Hill had discussed Thomas's actions at the time she worked for Thomas and that she had characterized them as sexual harassment.

Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson, reporters for the Wall Street Journal, concluded in an investigative book on Thomas that “the preponderance of the evidence suggests” that Thomas lied under oath when he told the committee he had not harassed Hill. Mayer and Abramson say Biden abdicated control of the Thomas confirmation hearings and did not call Angela Wright to the stand. According to Mayer and Abramson, four women traveled to Washington DC to corroborate Anita Hill’s claims.

According to Mayer and Abramson, soon after Thomas was sworn in, three reporters for The Washington Post “burst into the newsroom almost simultaneously with information confirming that Thomas’ involvement with pornography far exceeded what the public had been led to believe.” These reporters had eyewitness testimony and video rental records showing Thomas’ interest in and use of pornography. However, because Thomas was already sworn in by the time the video store evidence emerged, The Washington Post dropped the story.

Thomas denied all allegations of sexual harassment and sexual impropriety by Hill and the others. Of the committee's investigation of the accusations, Thomas said: "This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree."

After extensive debate, the committee sent the nomination to the full Senate without a recommendation either way. Thomas was confirmed by the Senate with a 52-48 vote on October 15, 1991, the narrowest margin for approval in more than a century. The final floor vote was not along strictly party lines: 41 Republicans and 11 Democrats voted to confirm while 46 Democrats and two Republicans (Jim Jeffords (R-VT) and Bob Packwood (R-OR)) voted to reject the nomination.

On October 23, 1991, Thomas took his seat as the 106th Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

Early Days on the Court

Though Thomas was immediately welcomed by most Justices, including Marshall, whom he was replacing, law clerks of the more liberal justices viewed Thomas with ill-disguised contempt, questioning his qualifications and intellectual heft. According to Jan Crawford Greenburg, Justice Blackmun allowed his clerks to refer to Christopher Landau, a Thomas clerk, as "Justice," because they saw him as the one really "running the show." Greenburg called this "a rude and glaring breach of protocol." Greenburg says that pundits' portrayal of Thomas as Scalia's understudy was grossly inaccurate - she says that from early on, it was more often Scalia changing his mind to agree with Thomas, rather than the other way around. However, Greenburg points out that the extremity of Thomas's views pushed Justices Souter, O'Connor, and Kennedy away.

Judicial philosophy

Clarence Thomas being sworn in by Byron White, as wife Virginia Lamp Thomas looks on.

Clarence Thomas is a conservative who acknowledges having some "libertarian leanings." Thomas is often described as an originalist. Although he has been compared to Antonin Scalia, he is less devoted to precedent than Scalia, who told Thomas' biographer that Thomas "doesn't believe in stare decisis, period. If a constitutional line of authority is wrong, he would say let's get it right." In Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow and Cutter v. Wilkinson, Thomas argued that the Establishment Clause was not incorporated to states by the Fourteenth Amendment, directly challenging the precedent Everson v. Board of Education. He has advocated the reversal of Roe v. Wade, joining the dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and writing the concurrence in Gonzales v. Carhart. Thomas voted with Scalia 91 percent of the time during the court's 2006–07 session. He voted with Justice John Paul Stevens the least, only 36% of the time. Justice Thomas's forceful views have pushed moderates like Sandra Day O'Connor further to the left.

Commerce Clause and states' rights

Thomas consistently supports a strict interpretation of the Constitution's interstate commerce clause and supports limits on the power of federal government in favor of states' rights. In both United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison Thomas wrote a separate concurring opinion arguing for the original meaning of the commerce clause and criticizing the substantial effects formula. He wrote a sharply worded dissent in Gonzales v. Raich, a decision that permitted the federal government to arrest, prosecute, and imprison patients who were using medical marijuana. However, he previously authored United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, an earlier case that also permitted the federal government to inspect medical marijuana dispensaries (the Oakland case dealt with the issue of medical necessity rather than federalism).

Capital punishment

Thomas was among the dissenters in both Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons, which held that the Constitution prohibited the application of the death penalty to certain classes of persons. In Kansas v. Marsh, his opinion for the court indicated a belief that the Constitution affords states broad procedural latitude in imposing the death penalty provided they remain within the limits of Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia, the 1976 case in which the court had reversed its 1972 ban on death sentences as long as states followed certain procedural guidelines.

Fourth Amendment

In the cases regarding the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, Thomas often favors police over defendants, although not always—he was in the majority in Kyllo v. United States and wrote separately in Indianapolis v. Edmond the opinion that the Constitution does not allow random stops of drivers. His opinion for the court in Board of Education v. Earls upheld drug testing for students involved in extracurricular activities, and wrote again for the court in Samson v. California, permitting random searches on parolees. He dissented in the case Georgia v. Randolph, which prohibited warrantless searches that one resident approves and the other opposes, arguing that the case was controlled by the court's decision in Coolidge v. New Hampshire.

Free speech

Among Supreme Court Justices, Thomas is typically the second most likely to uphold free speech claims (he is tied with Souter). He has voted in favor of First Amendment claims in cases involving a wide variety of issues, including pornography, campaign contributions, political leafletting, religious speech, and commercial speech. On occasion, however, he disagrees with free speech claimants. For example, he dissented in Virginia v. Black, a case that struck down a Virginia statute that banned cross-burning, and authored ACLU v. Ashcroft, which referred the Child Online Protection Act back to District Court, where COPA was overturned. In addition, Thomas believes that students have limited free speech rights in public schools, a view he expressed in his concurrence in Morse v. Frederick. In that case, he argued that the precedent of Tinker v. Des Moines should be overruled.

Executive power

Thomas has argued that the executive branch has broad powers under the constitution. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, he was the only Justice who sided entirely with the government and the Fourth Circuit's ruling, arguing for the important security interests at stake and the President's broad war-making powers. He also was one of three justices who dissented in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which held that the military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay required explicit congressional authorization because they conflicted with both the Unified Military Code of Justice and "at least" Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention...." Thomas argued that Hamdan is an illegal combatant and therefore not protected by the Geneva convention, and also agreed with Justice Scalia that the Court was "patently erroneous" in it's declaration of jurisdiction in this case.

Prisoners' Rights

In the Foucha case of Thomas's first term, Thomas dissented from the majority Supreme Court opinion removing from a mental institution a prisoner who had become sane. Thomas cast the issue as a states' rights matter.

In 1992's Hudson v. McMillan, Thomas said that injuries to a prisoner that involved a cracked lip, broken dental plate, loosened teeth, and cuts and bruises (all from what Thomas said was admittedly criminal police brutality) "did not rise to the level" of cruel and unusual punishment. Thomas's vote, the only one against the prisoner and an early example of Thomas's willingness to be the sole dissenter, would have rejected the prisoner's lawsuit had it been the majority view (Scalia later joined the opinion).

In 1992's Doggett v. United States, Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion for himself and Rehnquist to uphold the conviction of a man who was indicted on a drug charge, but then not arrested for almost nine years. Thomas wrote that dismissing the conviction "invites the Nation's judges to indulge in ad hoc and result-driven second guessing of the government's investigatory efforts. Our Constitution neither contemplates nor tolerates such a role."

Approach to oral arguments

Thomas is well-known for listening rather than asking questions during oral arguments of the Court. He has offered several reasons for this, including that he developed a habit of listening as a young man. Thomas comes from the Gullah/Geechee cultural region of coastal Georgia and is a member of this distinct African American ethnic group; he grew up speaking the Gullah language, which is a hybrid of English and various West African languages. Later in life, Thomas began to acquire an enthusiasm for his heritage, writing about it in the December 14 2000 issue of The New York Times:

"When I was 16, I was sitting as the only black kid in my class, and I had grown up speaking a kind of a dialect. It's called Geechee. Some people call it now, and people praise it now. But they used to make fun of us back then. It's not standard English. When I transferredPOUNDING BAT SODOMY!!!! ASSHOLEDICKCUNTFUCKSHITASSDAMNBALLSTESTICLESSCROTUM!!!</ref>

Thomas has stated that he wishes to write a book about the Gullah culture.

Another theory, asserted by one set of Thomas biographers, is that he believes oral arguments are mostly unnecessary, and that the back-and-forth in oral arguments is often disrespectful to the attorneys trying to present their cases. (This view has been supported by Ann Scarlett, Professor at the Saint Louis University School of Law, who was one of his law clerks.) The same biographers also theorize Thomas is uncomfortable in the rapid pacing of oral argument discussions, the supposition being he prefers a more cerebral, quieter environment in which to carefully contemplate matters of constitutional law.

In comments in November 2007, Thomas proffered his position on the subject: "My colleagues should shut up!" he said to an audience at Hillsdale College in Michigan. He later explained, "I don't think that for judging, and for what we are doing, all those questions are necessary", and compared his profession to the medical arts: "Suppose you're undergoing something very serious like surgery and the doctors started a practice of conducting seminars while in the operating room, debating each other about certain procedures and whether or not this procedure is this way or that way. You really didn't go in there to have a debate about gall bladder surgery."

Though Thomas is silent during most arguments before the Supreme Court, he had, up until his 16th term, spoken a few times each term. During the oral argument for NASA v. FLRA, In Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000), Thomas raised an issue which would become important in the opinions ("the distinction... between an element of the offense and an enhancement factor"). In Capitol Square Review Board v. Pinette (1995), Virginia v. Black (2003), and Georgia v. Randolph (2006), Thomas presaged his eventual dissent with comments at oral argument.

Upon the conclusion of the 2006-2007 term of the Supreme Court, it was widely noted that Thomas had failed to utter a single word from the bench during the course of the entire term. In November 2007, in a tongue-in-cheek manner, the Law Blog of the Wall Street Journal initiated the "When-Will-Justice-Thomas-Ask-a-Question Watch", noting that the justice had not asked a single question during oral arguments since February 22, 2006. February 22, 2008, marked the two year anniversary of Thomas's last question during oral argument, a milestone which was noted by several media outlets, including CNN. Another reference to his silence was made in the Boston Legal episode The Court Supreme where Denny Crane made a bet regarding whether Alan Shore could get the fictional Justice Thomas to talk.

Bibliography

References

This section uses citations that link to broken or outdated sources. Please improve the article by addressing link rot or discuss this issue on the talk page. (January 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
  1. The New York Times. "THE THOMAS NOMINATION; Excerpts From Judiciary Committee's Interview of Angela Wright." Oct. 4, 1991.
  2. The New York Times. "THE THOMAS NOMINATION; Excerpts From Judiciary Committee's Interview of Angela Wright." Oct. 4, 1991.
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference gpo442-511 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ "United States Senate, Transcript of Proceedings" (pdf). gpoaccess.gov. 1991-10-10. pp. pp. 512–559. Retrieved 2008-09-18. {{cite web}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  5. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh102-1084pt4/512-559.pdf
  6. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100201822.html
  7. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1896
  8. http://hnn.us/comments/121846.html
  9. HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON THE NOMINATION OF CLARENCE THOMAS TO BE ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
  10. ^ Lacayo, Richard (2001-06-24). "The Unheard Witnesses". TIME. Retrieved 2008-09-18.
  11. Toobin, Jeffrey. The Nine. First Anchor Books Edition, September 2008. Page 39.
  12. Toobin, Jeffrey. The Nine. First Anchor Books Edition, September 2008. Pages 38-39.
  13. Toobin, Jeffrey. The Nine. First Anchor Books Edition, September 2008. Page 39.
  14. Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library, October 11, 1991.
  15. Hall, Kermit (ed), The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States, page 871, Oxford Press, 1992
  16. Packwood himself would later be forced to resign from the Senate in the face accusations of sexual harassment, abuse and assault by numerous former staffers and lobbyists.
  17. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 112.
  18. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Pages 112-113.
  19. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 115.
  20. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Pages 115-116.
  21. Kauffman B., "Clarence Thomas", Reason Magazine, November 1987, Accessed May 7, 2007.
  22. "A Big Question About Clarence Thomas", The Washington Post, October 14, 2004. Accessed May 7, 2007.
  23. Greenhouse, Linda."In Steps Big and Small, Supreme Court Moved Right", New York Times, July 1, 2007.
  24. Greenhouse, Linda. "In Steps Big and Small, Supreme Court, Moved Right", The New York Times, July 1, 2007.
  25. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 166.
  26. Volokh, Eugene. How the Justices Voted in Free Speech Cases, 1994-2002, UCLA Law
  27. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Supreme Court Syllabus, pg. 4., point 4.
  28. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 117.
  29. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 117.
  30. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 119.
  31. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 119.
  32. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 123.
  33. Greenburg, Jan Crawford. Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.2007. Penguin Books. Page 123.
  34. Gullah
  35. This information was related in a 2006 conversation with law student Daren Rich, when asked why Justice Thomas was often silent during oral arguments.
  36. Blog
  37. U.S. News & World Report
  38. New York Times
  39. 527 U.S. 229 (1999)
  40. 515 U.S. 753
  41. Law.com
  42. Wall Street Journal Law Blog
  43. CNN article on lack of questions for 2 years

Sources

External links

Legal offices
Preceded byRobert Bork Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1990-1991 		Succeeded byJudith Ann Wilson Rogers
Preceded byThurgood Marshall Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
1991-present
U.S. order of precedence (ceremonial)
Preceded byDavid Souter
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States 		United States order of precedence
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States 		Succeeded byRuth Bader Ginsburg
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
Judicial opinions of Clarence Thomas
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (March 6, 1990 – October 17, 1991); by calendar year
Supreme Court of the United States (October 18, 1991 – present); by term

Template:Start U.S. Supreme Court composition Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition court lifespan Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition 1991-1993 Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition 1993-1994 Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition 1994-2005 Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition court lifespan Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition 2005-2006 Template:U.S. Supreme Court composition 2006-present Template:End U.S. Supreme Court composition


{{subst:#if:Thomas, Clarence|}} [[Category:{{subst:#switch:{{subst:uc:1948}} 

|| UNKNOWN | MISSING = Year of birth missing {{subst:#switch:{{subst:uc:LIVING}}||LIVING=(living people)}}
| #default = 1948 births

}}]] {{subst:#switch:{{subst:uc:LIVING}} 

|| LIVING  = 
| MISSING  = 
| UNKNOWN  = 
| #default =

}}

Template:Persondata

Categories: