Clarence Thomas’s Disgraceful Silence

[babylonsister]

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/02/clarence-thomas-disgraceful-silence.html

February 21, 2014
Clarence Thomas’s Disgraceful Silence
Posted by Jeffrey Toobin


As of this Saturday, February 22nd, eight years will have passed since Clarence Thomas last asked a question during a Supreme Court oral argument. His behavior on the bench has gone from curious to bizarre to downright embarrassing, for himself and for the institution he represents.

This point was especially apparent on January 13th, when the Court considered the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, which raises important questions about the President’s ability to fill vacancies when the Senate is in recess. It was a superb argument—highly skilled lawyers engaging with eight inquisitive judges. The case also offered a kind of primer on the state of the Court in action, with Thomas’s colleagues best viewed in pairs.

snip//

For better or worse, Thomas has made important contributions to the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. He has imported once outré conservative ideas, about such issues as gun rights under the Second Amendment and deregulation of political campaigns, into the mainstream. Scalia wrote District of Columbia v. Heller, which restricted gun control, and Kennedy wrote Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which undermined decades of campaign-finance law, but Thomas was an intellectual godfather of both decisions.

Still, there is more to the job of Supreme Court Justice than writing opinions. The Court’s arguments are not televised (though they should be), but they are public. They are, in fact, the public’s only windows onto the Justices’ thought processes, and they offer the litigants and their lawyers their only chance to look these arbiters in the eye and make their case. There’s a reason the phrase “your day in court” resonates. It is an indispensable part of the legal system.

But the process works only if the Justices engage. The current Supreme Court is almost too ready to do so, and sometimes lawyers have a hard time getting a word in edgewise. In question-and-answer sessions at law schools, Thomas has said that his colleagues talk too much, that he wants to let the lawyers say their piece, and that the briefs tell him all he needs to know. But this—as his colleagues’ ability to provoke revealing exchanges demonstrates—is nonsense. Thomas is simply not doing his job.

By refusing to acknowledge the advocates or his fellow-Justices, Thomas treats them all with disrespect. It would be one thing if Thomas’s petulance reflected badly only on himself, which it did for the first few years of his ludicrous behavior. But at this point, eight years on, Thomas is demeaning the Court. Imagine, for a moment, if all nine Justices behaved as Thomas does on the bench. The public would rightly, and immediately, lose all faith in the Supreme Court. Instead, the public has lost, and should lose, any confidence it might have in Clarence Thomas.

[theHandpuppet]

1. I'd heard something to this effect a couple of months ago

It's a given he's an ass but what the hell is up with his silence on the bench?

[Buns_of_Fire]

5. "Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool..."

Attributed to almost everyone except Victoria Jackson (with good reason).
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/17/remain-silent/

[theHandpuppet]

6. I suspect that's a major part of it

Frankly, I think we really need to revisit these lifetime appointments to the Court.

[Niceguy1]

2. haven't other justices

Taken his approach in the past?

[COLGATE4]

3. None in recent history, at least.

Slappy's presence on the highest court in the land is an affront to all Americans, and most particularly to African Americans.

[awoke_in_2003]

7. Slappy?...

On edit: I probably should have google first. Slappy is a dummy, which makes sense since Clarence always echoes Scalia's views. Sorry for thinking you may have been using a racist term.

[backscatter712]

10. Can I call him Uncle?

Well, at least let me post his most recent portrait:

[former9thward]

4. Thomas thinks oral arguments are a waste of time.

He believes that no one's mind is changed during oral arguments and that the justices make up their minds beforehand based on the briefs that have been submitted. Most Supreme Court attorneys think that is true but no one is going to give up the chance to argue before the Supreme Court.

[nomorenomore08]

8. He disgraces not only his great predecessor Thurgood Marshall, but every competent justice

who has ever served on the Court. And does anyone think he's stopped sexually harassing women, after he got away with doing it to Anita Hill? I high doubt it...

[quinnox]

9. And interrupt Thomas's nap time? Ain't going to happen

Clarence Thomas has been an embarrassment to the S.C. for a very long time, and he seems to be very proud of it. This clown should have been removed from the court years ago.