The court is expected to weigh in next session on same-sex marriage, which it legalized in 2015
Settled legal precedent in the US is not “gospel” and in some instances may have been “something somebody dreamt up and others went along with”, the US supreme court justice Clarence Thomas has said.
Thomas – part of the conservative supermajority that has taken hold of the supreme court over Donald Trump’s two presidencies – delivered those comments Thursday at the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law in Washington DC, ABC News and other outlets reported. His remarks preceded the nine-month term that the supreme court is scheduled to begin on 6 October.
“I don’t think that … any of these cases that have been decided are the gospel,” Thomas said during the rare public appearance, invoking a term which in a religious context is often used to refer to the word of God. “And I do give perspective to the precedent. But … the precedent should be respectful of our legal tradition, and our country and our laws, and be based on something – not just something somebody dreamt up and others went along with.”
In other words, Uncle Thomas is done pretending he cares about the law
Yeah… Wonder if he’s already got a carve out written up specifically for him when they overturn the civil rights act or interracial marriage?
Just a reminder that this fucker sexually harassed Anita Hill for years.
And subjected other colleagues and associates to his porn addiction at the very least.
It won’t be precedent. It will be amount of RVs donated.
MOTOR COACH!
God, that story seems like a lifetime ago.
“precedent” was destroyed in 2022. The Supreme Court are just tools of the christian cult. They have destroyed American law.
American law is as stable as a house of cards when half the country would rather base the law on presumptions of what 18th century white supremacists might have preferred to the needs of Americans in the 21st century…
Precedent was destroyed long before then…
Yuppp
We gotta change this lifetime appointment bullshit. Fuck this uncle tom loser asshole.
So wouldn’t this mean that past SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant to new cases? So people could legitimately keep bringing near-identical cases to the SCOTUS level and have a legitimate expectation for them to be decided? That sounds obviously unwise even by current SCOTUS standards.
Mind you, Thomas probably wants to go by a rule of “precedent matters when I say it does”, so consistency is irrelevant.
I think to a degree it’s never mattered. If the composition of the Supreme Court has changed enough, then they just come up with their own ad-hoc justification to make new rulings over old cases. Before her death, I remember RBG was encouraging the public to bring new cases regarding older rulings.
Clarence Thomas is the kind of man who after spending 12 years a slave would go out and hunt runaway slaves for his own new land.
Why start respecting 200 years of norms in American law now?
A lot of words for “I don’t like it”
I have completely lost all confidence in our government.
There is an extremely long history of discussion about Clarence Thomas and stare decisis / precedent.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/us/politics/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-precedent.html
Ok, then when trump leaves and a democrat packs the court, then who gives a fuck? It’s not like the number of judges is gospel or anything. Or an age limit, again if we’re not going to follow the rules then who fucking cares
As much as I want it, I don’t think the Democrats will ever be willing to pack the court. -and that makes me a little depressed.
The last time they had the chance, polling told them Americans wouldn’t be happy so they left it alone.
It’s neat how they pay attention to what Americans want when it’s the politically easy thing to do.
Just Clarence Thomas doing Clarence Thomas things.
Fun fact, Clarence Thomas’ reaction to Samuel L Jackson in Django Unchained was, “Sam’s getting soft in his old age.”
