Clarence Thomas speaks after 10 years of silence

[rsacamano]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[saturnsring]

1. was it " who ami, why am i here?" or was it something about pubic hair on his coke can

[SmittynMo]

2. I have always thought he was very strange.

10 years without speaking?

He's been playing mental games with himself ever since Anita Hill.

And now that Scalia is gone, he opens up?

WTF is up with this guy? Very strange indeed.

[FailureToCommunicate]

3. Ha! He came out of his Rip Van Winkle stupor and asked a question on a point they were NOT

deciding. In fact the subject was agreed earlier to not be any part of this case.

He's like the high schooler who wakes up in class and gives a completely whack a doodle answer.

What a loser Thomas is.

[malthaussen]

4. Down the hall to the right, judge. n/t

[WhoIsNumberNone]

5. Next man up, as they say in the NFL...

Scalia went down, so coach Koch put Thomas in

[libodem]

6. Miss Ginny

And the Tea Party is what is the matter with him.

Talk about Stockholm Syndrome.

Egregious.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

7. Thomas once castigated Justice Kagan for asking lawyers questions

From a 2012 speech by Justice Thomas:

LEXINGTON, Ky. -- Maybe it's Southern courtesy or his introverted nature that keeps him from interrupting attorneys during oral arguments, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said Thursday evening.

Whatever the reason, the Georgia native had a blunt assessment about the rapid-fire questioning from his colleagues during recent hearings on the nation's health care law. The queries weren't helpful to him in deciding the case, he said.

And Thomas suggested his loquacious colleagues should do more listening and less talking.

"I don't see where that advances anything," he said of the questions. "Maybe it's the Southerner in me. Maybe it's the introvert in me, I don't know. I think that when somebody's talking, somebody ought to listen."

-- snip --

He said the lawyers presenting their cases are capable and don't need guidance from the justices: "I don't need to hold your hand, help you cross the street to argue a case. I don't need to badger you."

Thomas was asked specifically about the plethora of questions during three days of oral arguments as the justices decide whether to kill or keep President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. But Thomas said it's become habit for justices to interrupt lawyers.

"We have a lifetime to go back in chambers and to argue with each other," he said. "They have 30, 40 minutes per side for cases that are important to them and to the country. They should argue. That's a part of the process.

"I don't like to badger people. These are not children. The court traditionally did not do that. I have been there 20 years. I see no need for all of that. Most of that is in the briefs, and there are a few questions around the edges." link

----------------

Attorneys are forewarned about expecting interrogation from the bench.

From the Supreme Court's Guide for Counsel, page 5:

Your allotted time passes quickly, espe­cially when numerous questions come from the Court.
link

----------------
Questions by the justices narrow the issues to those that really matter (prevent the attorneys from throwing spaghetti at the wall) and explore the "law of unintended consequences."

What does he come out of his lair to protect? Guns!

[thesquanderer]

8. Scalia: "I'll give you a dollar every day you don't open your mouth!"

But that gravy train is gone.

[zebonaut]

9. My Granny had a stroke. She spoke after only 7 years