I think you misspelled “Crazy” above Aunty Scalia’s photo…
I’m not a Clarence Thomas fan, but the infographic struck me as racist in effect if not in intent. Scalia is the one who is batshit-insane, after all. Also, Scalia and Alito are as much corporate apologists as Roberts is, and Thomas is a pretty standard conservative.
You infographic affords all of the justices respect except Thomas. I think this sends a bad message (and might also reflect your own unexamined racism). When we’re part of a racist society, we need to be extra careful how we portray those who are not in the privileged class. It’s all too easy to unconsciously fall back on stereotypes.
Clarence Thomas is an impossible cypher. The fact that he’s also black does not mean he can’t be called out as an enigma. Criticising someone for their actions and speech is not racist. Trying to tie his actions to his race is, and there’s no evidence of Rob doing that here.
So what crazy thing has Thomas done? I read somewhere that he declared himself 3/5 of a judge, but I’m assuming that’s a joke based on the same bizarre ruling that he clearly must have done.
Scalia may be batshit, but he’s also infinitely predictable. You can pretty much always predict how he’s going to vote on an issue.
HE has never asked a single question in open court, for one weird thing. Has he spoken at all in court?
You really don’t know why he referred to himself as 3/5 of a judge? With Internet it’s hard to read sarcasm. I’ll play is straight and give you an answer. Southern states were allowed to count blacks as 3/5 of a person in determining House representation back in the slavery days.
a) “Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?”
a.1) After sexually harassing Anita Hill, worked to protect sexual harassers.
b) Officiated Rush Limbaugh’s third marriage.
c) Didn’t speak in court or ask a legal question during oral arguments for a seven year stretch.
d) Wrote in his autobiography that he resented that as a black man he wasn’t permitted to listen to Carole King.
e) Is flagrantly racist in his rulings (perhaps this isn’t crazy, but it’s still odious).
f) Expressed the position that States are Constitutionally entitled to establish religions.
Yes. it does appear very easy.
Must. Resist. Race-. Baiting. Troll…
Iirc, Scalia has argued that actual innocence isn’t enough reason to stop an execution.
He’s written some strange opinions lately, too:
Racism me a river.
Scalia’s the loud-mouth, and Thomas is the quiet one. Kind of like Penn and Teller, only Scalia and Thomas are bad guys who write fire-breathing opinions, while Penn and Teller are good guys who can actually breathe fire.
(I thought the writing over Thomas’s picture said something about Cthulhu.)
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.
The New Yorker is offering more measured, well-written criticism? Of Thomas’ work as a member of the Supreme Court?
Okay, but you know . . . Clarence Thomas is black!
(Handy conservative tactic: Whenever a black conservative’s ideas or work are criticized, just play the race card!)
By the standards of the second half of the 20th century, the court’s four “liberals” aren’t that liberal. As with the rest of American politics, the Supreme Court is well to the right of its 50-year average.
Probably could have chosen a better link, but the fact is Thomas has asked questions and spoken up in his tenure. Any other conclusions you might reach from that article was not my intention.
The Amicus podcast from Slate just did an episode on the issue. It’s an interesting listen. I used to have an opinion like the New Yorker article, but now I’m not so sure. (His actual opinions, though, I strongly disagree with).