For most of his career on the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Clarence Thomas, who has been regarded as an intellectual lightweight by liberal critics, has embraced his “apparent mentor” Antonin Scalia. Judge’s marching order New York Times Legal expert Linda Greenhouse once said sarcastically.
Greenhouse et al have no idea what they are talking about, to say the least. In fact, it was Thomas who quietly influenced Scalia in certain areas of the law, as Scalia himself has acknowledged many times. Thomas’ critics underestimate him at their own peril.
The Supreme Court’s recently concluded 2021-2022 term has pushed this forward in retaliation. On one hot issue after another, Thomas’ view now prevails. Like it or not, Thomas Court is here.
That’s not even the full story of Thomas’ impact on American law. Think like this. Judges can change the legal landscape in a number of ways.One way is an illustration of a career Justice Anthony Kennedy, someone who has been in the right place at the right time for a long time. As a social liberal/fiscal conservative, Kennedy was perfectly placed on a deeply divided court, casting a tie-breaking fifth vote in several major cases, most notably a constitutional showdown over gay rights. With the stars of justice all in his favor, Kennedy now has a place in the legal history books.
By contrast, Thomas shaped the law through the long game. Over the past three decades, he has repeatedly advanced solitary positions—often writing dissenting opinions, but sometimes a separate consent form—only to see many of his “extreme” positions end up in law. What’s more, generations of conservative law students who went on to become conservative lawyers, legislators and judges have embraced many of Thomas’s views as their own. Thomas’ influence on the wider conservative legal movement will be felt for years to come.
The arrival of Thomas Court is not good news for Americans who want to see every part of the Bill of Rights enforced with equal judicial vigour.Yes, Second Amendment advocates certainly have reason to cheer For Thomas, he may be the most hawkish judge in cases dealing with the right to keep and bear arms. But First Amendment advocates have little cause for celebration.as i did before famous“Thomas’ recent statements in support of the administration’s increased control over ‘digital platforms’ such as Twitter and Facebook have somewhat damaged his good faith in the First Amendment.”
Then comes the issue of criminal justice, where Thomas’ jurisprudence is quite Respect for police and prosecutors. Take his record on the Fourth Amendment.exist Navarrete v.California (2014), Thomas’ majority opinion was blast dissent It was Scalia who denounced Thomas’ interpretation as a “freedom-destroying cocktail” that contradicted the fundamental principles of the Constitution. “This is not my concept, and I’m sure it would not be the framers’ concept, about a people that is immune to unreasonable searches and seizures,” Scalia wrote of Thomas’s views. Not the best thing a person claiming to be an original can say to another person.