Translation: “Oh HELL no. The last thing I want is that man puttering around the house all day, muttering about the heat, and asking me where his socks are while I am trying to watch Ellen!”
Why would he retire? He has a couple places to nap, clerks to do almost all of his work, and he gets paid for doing this. It’s not like he asks questions or writes a lot of opinions.
Clarance, don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
And then when he does…
"with one seat left vacant by the death of Scalia while he was in the company of a secretive society of elite hunters
When I read that, I picture Scalia hunting homeless veterans for sport.
That’s an accurate image.
Actually, he does. Sometimes majority opinions. Sometimes cantankerous dissents.
If a Democrat – presumably Hillary Clinton – wins the 2016 election, they could leave office with a 7-2 “liberal” bench that could endure for years to come
Thanks for those q marks around liberal. Less conservative (without q marks) is an even better way to put it.
Like I would trust the Washington Examiner to be able to write anything of non-Conservative scare tactics. This is a panicked cry to come out and vote Trump.
Good point. Breyer defected recently.
Strieff itself involves a fairly simple question of constitutional law. Typically, when police illegally stop an individual on the street without reasonable suspicion, any fruits of that stop—such as the discovery of illegal drugs—must be suppressed in court, because the stop was “unreasonable seizure” under the Fourth Amendment. Strieff gave the justices an opportunity to affirm this constitutional rule. But instead, Justice Stephen Breyer joined the court’s four conservatives to add a huge loophole to that long-established doctrine
OT but WOW, that was weird… ;>_>
You’re correct and I should have been clearer. I meant that:
From The New York Times:
"Clarence Thomas, a Supreme Court Justice of Few Words, Some Not His Own
The very concept of a Supreme Court weighted to either the left or the right really scares me. I hope that somewhere out there is a prospective judge that actually puts constitutional protections above politics.
Oh wow. Thanks for the link.
There are ones that do. But they get labelled as “liberal!” and then where are we? Kennedy is easily considered that way by a great vocal group but he’s certainly right down the middle of a large pack of various ideas.
That said, a great many of the Court’s decisions through the years have been seen as “too liberal” when they just got there before the rest of the country and had to drag a lot of people kicking and screaming, civil rights being one example. I mean, Miranda rights were a 5-4 decision and it seems pretty plain that “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself” is pretty clearly stated in the 5th Amendment.
The problem is mostly from the Conservative side.
We had for a long time 2 “stealth moderates” on the bench, Sandra Day O’Connor and David Souter. Both were brought in by Republican presidents. Neither of them had much of a background which was noted for being arch conservatives. Once they got to the bench, they loosened up a bit and tended to rule based on their beliefs of Constitutional interpretations. Which were fairly middle of the road to slightly liberal.
From that point on, the GOP started to look for candidates who were full blown wingnuts. People they were sure would vote the Republican political line at all times. Roberts and Alito were brought in as the remedy to O’Connor and Souter.
That will make it through the confirmation hearings?
also:
is said to be “mulling retirement” after the election in order to travel America in an RV with his wife.
Update: Clarence Thomas’s wife Ginny has angrily denied this in a Facebook post: “For all those contacting me about the possibility of my husband retiring, I say — unsubscribe from those false news sources and carry on with your busy lives.”
Seems like she does not want to travel America in an RV.
