Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a concurring opinion released on Friday that the Supreme Court “should reconsider” its past rulings codifying rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage.
The sweeping suggestion from the current court’s longest-serving justice came in the concurring opinion he authored in response to the court’s ruling revoking the constitutional right to abortion, also released on Friday…
Since May, when POLITICO published an initial draft majority opinion of the court’s decision on Friday to strike down Roe v. Wade, Democratic politicians have repeatedly warned that such a ruling would lead to the reversal of other landmark privacy-related cases.
Now that the Dems have “warned us” it’s appropriate they get off their rusty butts and stand up for the rights and needs of the American people. Not just the “usual” sources they rely on for campaign donations.
4 thoughts on “Injustice Thomas: SCOTUS ‘should reconsider’ contraception, same-sex marriage rulings”
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas told his law clerks he intended to serve on the highest court of the land to make the lives of liberals “miserable,” according to a 1993 report from The New York Times. https://www.businessinsider.com/clarence-thomas-told-clerks-he-wants-to-make-liberals-miserable-2022-6
“2 Years After His Bruising Hearing, Justice Thomas Can Rarely Be Heard” (NYT Nov 23, 1993) https://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/27/us/2-years-after-his-bruising-hearing-justice-thomas-can-rarely-be-heard.html
“…The notion that Justice Thomas could use his position to reflect the emotions he bears from the confirmation hearing was first suggested, strangely enough, by his wife, Virginia.
“Clarence will give everyone a fair day in court,” Mrs. Thomas said. “But I feel he doesn’t owe any of the groups who opposed him anything.” (People magazine Nov. 11, 1991)
“This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint as a Black American, as far as I’m concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity Blacks, who in any way deign to think for themselves,” he said. “And it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured, by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.” Judge Clarence Thomas during his 1991 confirmation hearing in response to accusations of sexual harassment https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10510979809368530
…why stop there, why not ‘reconsider’ the 19th amendment as well?
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday expressed a desire to revisit a landmark 1964 ruling that makes it relatively difficult to bring successful lawsuits against media outlets for defamation.
Thomas’s statement came in response to the court’s decision to turn away an appeal from a Christian nonprofit group who disputed their characterization by the civil rights watchdog group Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
Coral Ridge Ministries Media sued the SPLC for defamation for listing them as a hate group on their public database, which led to Amazon excluding Coral Ridge as a recipient of charitable contributions from online shoppers. https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3538084-clarence-thomas-signals-interest-in-making-it-easier-to-sue-media/
Southern Poverty Law Center “18 Anti-Gay Groups and Their Propaganda” (November 2010) https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2010/18-anti-gay-groups-and-their-propaganda scroll down for Coral Ridge Ministries.
See also https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/justice-thomas-southern-poverty-law-centers-hate-group-designation-of-christian-ministry-shows-its-time-to-revisit-times-v-sullivan/
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in a dissenting opinion Thursday suggested that Covid-19 vaccines were developed using the cells of “aborted children.”
The conservative justice’s statement came in a dissenting opinion on a case in which the Supreme Court declined to hear a religious liberty challenge to New York’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate from 16 health care workers. The state requires that all health care workers show proof of vaccination.
“They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Thomas said of the petitioners.
None of the Covid-19 vaccines in the United States contain the cells of aborted fetuses. Cells obtained from elective abortions decades ago were used in testing during the Covid vaccine development process, a practice that is common in vaccine testing — including for the rubella and chickenpox vaccinations. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/30/clarence-thomas-claims-covid-vaccines-are-derived-from-the-cells-of-aborted-children-00043483