View source for Clarence Thomas

{{Officeholder
|name=Clarence Thomas
|image=Thmas.jpg
|party=
|spouse=Kate Ambush Thomas (div.)<br/>Virginia Lamp Thomas
|religion=[[Roman Catholic]]
|offices=
	{{Officeholder/Supreme Court Justice
	|role=Associate
	|nominator=[[George H. W. Bush]]
	|terms=October 19, 1991 – present
	|preceded=[[Thurgood Marshall]]
	|former=n
	|succeeded=
	}}
}}
:''Clarence Thomas was [[Conservatives of the Decade, 2009|Conservative of the Decade]] for the 2000-2009 decade and [[Conservative of the Year]] in 2009.
'''Clarence Thomas''' (born June 23, 1948) is an [[Associate Justice]] of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]]. He was born in Savannah, [[Georgia]], which he often mentions in referencing his roots, such as in his book, ''My Grandfather's Son''. His most prominent decisions include his decision for the Court in favor of after-hours religious school clubs in ''[[Good News Club v. Milford Central School]]'', 533 U.S. 98 (2001), his decision for the 5–4 Court invalidating a federal government seizure of property as a violation of the [[Eighth Amendment]] in ''United States v. Bajakajian'', 524 U.S. 321, 324 (1998) and his stirring dissent from the 5–4 invalidation of term limits passed in an Arkansas referendum with respect to its congressmen, in ''[[U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton]]'', 514 U.S. 779 (1995) (Thomas, J., dissenting).

Justice Thomas is a leader on the Court in urging limits or elimination on incorporating the [[Establishment Clause]] against the States, because that clause was ratified as a federalist provision for protecting States against the new federal government.<ref>''See, e.g.'', ''[[Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow]]'', 542 U.S. 1, 45-46 (2004) (Thomas, J., concurring) (“[T]he Establishment Clause is a federalism provision, which, for this reason, resists incorporation.”); ''Zelman v. Simmons-Harris'', 536 U.S. 639, 677-680, and n. 3 (Thomas, J., concurring).</ref> He is also highly respected by legal scholars for adhering to an interpretation of the [[U.S. Constitution]] based on its original text, meaning and understanding, which has included limiting federal powers. His judicial doctrine finds no basis in the Constitution for [[abortion]], ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'', [[homosexual]] "rights," federal interference with state sovereignty, the [[Dormant Commerce Clause]] and constitutional limits on punitive damages. Compared to the rest of the court, Thomas strongly defends [[Second Amendment]] rights and has criticized the court for not doing more to protect it.<ref>Byas, Steve (February 21, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/28347-justice-thomas-supreme-court-does-not-give-second-amendment-due-respect Justice Thomas: Supreme Court Does Not Give Second Amendment Due Respect]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 21, 2018.</ref> Thomas has advocated for discarding faulty precedents when they clearly conflict with the text of the Constitution rather than irrationally clinging to such precedents.<ref>Clabough, Raven (June 18, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/32629-justice-clarence-thomas-opinion-decries-erroneous-precedent-hints-at-overturn-of-roe-v-wade Justice Thomas Opinion Decries “Erroneous Precedent,” Hints at Overturn of Roe v. Wade]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 18, 2019.</ref><ref>Freiburger, Calvin (June 18, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/thomas-calls-supreme-court-to-undo-demonstrably-erroneous-precedent-possibly-upending-roe Clarence Thomas says Supreme Court shouldn’t follow ‘erroneous precedent,’ possibly upending Roe]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 18, 2019.</ref><ref>Stempel, Jonathan (June 17, 2019). [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-thomas/justice-thomas-urges-us-supreme-court-to-feel-free-to-reverse-precedents-idUSKCN1TI2KJ Justice Thomas urges U.S. Supreme Court to feel free to reverse precedents]. ''Reuters''. Retrieved June 29, 2019.</ref>

Thomas has a straightforward writing style that presents his principled approach in a clear manner and his judicial temperament is undisputed. He has an unblemished record of service on the Court since 1991 and has never had to recuse himself from a case due to activity off the bench or investments.  He is also noted for rarely speaking during oral arguments on cases.  Over the course of his distinguished career, he has trained more [[conservative]] law clerks than any other Justice.

== Tribute ==

On July 18, 1995, [[Phyllis Schlafly]] wrote a humorous, enlightening poem in tribute to Justice Thomas:
{{cquote|No High Court Justice shows such promise
As our favorite, Clarence Thomas.

You're a jurist for the ages
<br>Who sends the [[liberal]]s into rages.

With your mighty brain and quill,
<br>You cramp the style of [[Hillary Clinton|Hillary]] and [[Bill Clinton|Bill]].

We're thrilled you've stopped the Left's destruction
<br>To be a voice for [[strict construction]].

With courageous resolution
<br>You stick to the text of our [[U.S. Constitution|Constitution]].

We're glad you've started to slap the paws
<br>Of liberals misusing the [[Commerce Clause]].

Justice Thomas, please don't relent
<br>In seeking out [[original intent]].

As we watch you face the strife,
<br>We thank [[God]] you're there for life.}}

== Early life ==
Thomas was born on June 23, 1948. His earliest stages of life were in [[Pinpoint]], [[Georgia]], until his mother took him and his younger brother, Myers Lee Thomas, to live in [[Savannah]]. However, his mother couldn't afford to take care of them, so she gave them to her father, Myers Anderson. Anderson raised them up on his farm, where Thomas and his brother were raised to be very hardworking.<ref>[[My Grandfather's Son]], by Clarence Thomas, 2007, pp. 1 - 13.</ref>

== Comparison with Justice Scalia ==
[[File:Donald Trump and Clarence Thomas.jpg|thumb|250px|President Trump and Justice Thomas, June 2018]]
Thomas is most often compared to Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], both support overturning ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'', both reject the existence of a [[Negative Commerce Clause]], both feel that the only restriction on how prisons treat inmates is what actually constitutes [[Cruel and Unusual Punishment]] under the [[Eighth Amendment]], and both support strong [[sovereign immunity]] for states by virtue of the [[Eleventh Amendment]].<ref>''[[Cent. Va. Cmty. College v. Katz]]'', 546 U.S. 356 (2006) (Thomas and Scalia, JJ., dissenting).</ref>

But these Justices have significant differences. Through the 2006–2007 term, Thomas had written 252 concurrences or dissents, of which Scalia had joined about 2/3rds. Conversely, Scalia had written 480 concurrences or dissents (he has served more years on the Court), of which Thomas had joined about half.

Thomas sided with [[free enterprise]] and wrote the opinion for the [[U.S. Supreme Court|Court]] in upholding an [[FCC]] rule that placed broadband cable services outside of the regulatory definition for "telecommunications service", despite how the [[FCC]] rejected a contrary ruling by a Court of Appeals.<ref>''[[Nat'l Cable and Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs.]]''</ref> Scalia dissented in a forceful manner, and thereby defended general judicial authority at the expense of [[free enterprise]].

Scalia typically rejects the use of legislative history more often than Thomas does. Scalia also rejects the important line of cases establishing a constitutional right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children, ''see [[Pierce v. Society of Sisters]]'', while Thomas has not rejected that line of cases or a constitutional right of parents in some limited cases.<ref>''See, e.g.'', [[Troxel v. Granville]] (2000).</ref>

Thomas takes a broader view of state sovereignty over intrastate activities against encroachment by the federal government. In ''[[Gonzales v. Raich]]'', 545 U.S. 1 (2005), Thomas dissented from the Court opinion that upheld a federal law that interfered with California's legalization of marijuana for alleged medical purposes. In other words, Thomas felt that the federal government lacked the power to interfere with state sovereignty over this intrastate activity. Scalia, in contrast, joined the majority of the Court in upholding application of federal law to destroy marijuana plants grown lawfully under California law.

Thomas also has taken more [[conservative]] positions than Scalia has. Thomas alone embraced a [[conservative]] view of the [[Second Amendment]]. In ''[[Printz v. United States]]'', Thomas wrote a concurrence strongly suggesting a [[conservative]], individual-rights view of the [[Second Amendment]]. No other Justice on the Court joined that concurrence. Only Thomas has expressed disagreement with the "aggregation principle" used to expand [[federal]] power based on the [[Commerce Clause]].<ref>[[United States v. Lopez]], 514 U.S. 549, 600, 131 L. Ed. 2d 626, 115 S. Ct. 1624 (1995) (concurring opinion).</ref>

Justices Thomas and Scalia differ on the issue of free speech and pornography. Thomas provided the crucial fifth vote in ''United States v. Playboy Entm't Group'', 529 U.S. 803 (2000), which rejected indecency regulation of cable television in part because "[t]he question is whether an actual problem has been proved in this case. We agree that the Government has failed to establish a pervasive, nationwide problem justifying its nationwide daytime speech ban."<ref>529 U.S. at 822-23.</ref> Scalia dissented, expressly his view that the government has broader powers under the [[First Amendment]] to regulate indecency on cable television.

Thomas again provided the key fifth vote in ''[[Ashcroft v. ACLU]]'', 542 U.S. 656 (2004), which invalidated as unconstitutional a federal law criminalizing the posting on a commercial website of pornography harmful to minors unless there were protections against access by minors. The 5-4 Court placed the burden on parents to keep their children away from pornographic sites, rather than allowing Congress to place the burden on pornographers to limit access to their sites. Scalia, Justice [[William Rehnquist]], Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]] and Justice [[Stephen Breyer]] dissented.

Thomas tends to oppose government power more often than Scalia does. In a 5-4 decision written by Thomas, from which Scalia dissented, Thomas held that the [[United States]] was wrong to seize $357,144 in cash from a traveler simply because he failed to report it as required by law. Thomas, writing for the Court, held that such a forfeiture "would violate the Excessive Fines Clause of the [[Eighth Amendment]] ... because full forfeiture of respondent's currency would be grossly disproportional to the gravity of his offense."<ref>''United States v. Bajakajian'', 524 U.S. 321, 324 (1998).</ref>

Thomas is more likely than Scalia to enforce a statute that is wrong as a matter of policy, as Thomas is more likely to hold that [[Congress]] alone can fix its own law.<ref>''[[Volvo Trucks N. Am., Inc. v. Reeder-Simco GMC]], Inc.'', 546 U.S. 164 (2006).</ref>

Thomas has called for ending a right of [[free speech]] for students in [[public school]], and stated his view that ''[[Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist.]]'', 393 U.S. 503 (1969), "is without basis in the Constitution" and should be overruled.<ref>[[Morse v. Frederick]], 127 S. Ct. 2618, 2630 (2007) (Thomas, J., concurring).</ref> Neither Scalia nor any other [[conservative]] has yet supported this position of Thomas.

On the [[Negative Commerce Clause]], Thomas is more reliable than Scalia in defending state laws that discriminate against out-of-state companies. Thomas, for example, wrote the dissent in the 5-4 decision invalidating a Michigan law that limited shipments by out-of-state wineries.<ref>''[[Granholm v. Heald]]''</ref> Scalia split from Thomas and surprisingly joined the more [[liberal]] majority in that case, which was presented using the issue of the [[Negative Commerce Clause]] but then decided based on slightly different grounds.

On the issue of compelled speech, Thomas stronger than Scalia in defending a [[First Amendment]] right not to pay for something with which one disagrees:<ref>[[United States v. United Foods]], 533 U.S. 405, 418-19 (2001) (Thomas, J., concurring)</ref>
{{cquote|I write separately, however, to reiterate my views that "paying money for the purposes of advertising involves speech," and that "compelling speech raises a First Amendment issue just as much as restricting speech." Id. at 504 (THOMAS, J., dissenting). Any regulation that compels the funding of advertising must be subjected to the most stringent First Amendment scrutiny.}}

Scalia did not join Thomas's concurrence above.

Justice Thomas favors reviving the "[[Privileges and Immunities Clause]]."

== Former Clerks ==
As a [[U.S. Supreme Court]] Justice, Thomas has mentored over 60 clerks. They include:

*[[Laura Ingraham]], [[conservative]] talk radio host<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lauraingraham.com/pg/jsp/general/aboutlaura.jsp;jsessionid=5436967F38FA6C73A4D5804B1F165ABE |title=About Laura Ingraham |work=[[Laura Ingraham]] }}</ref>
*Wendy Long, senior legal advisor and vice chair of [[Mitt Romney]]'s National Faith and Values Steering Committee<ref>{{cite web |last1=Rubin |first1=Jennifer |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080505233532/http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11799 |title=Judging Mitt |work=[[American Spectator]] |date=July 30, 2007 }}</ref>
*Professor Steven McAllister, [[University of Kansas]] School of Law

== Appointment to the United States Supreme Court ==
In 1991, upon the retirement of Justice [[Thurgood Marshall]], President [[George H.W. Bush]] nominated Thomas to fill the newly vacant seat. Supporters of [[abortion]] desperately opposed his nomination. 
Nonetheless, Thomas was confirmed by the Senate with a vote of 52–48, which was at the time the narrowest confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee in history.

Thomas has stated that the biggest impediment to his confirmation and his life, in general, were the "modern day liberal," and he noted that liberals held a double standard toward him because he was conservative.<ref>Multiple references:
*Chasmar, Jessica (October 23, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/oct/23/clarence-thomas-speaks-out-in-new-documentary-my-b/ Clarence Thomas speaks out in new documentary: My 'biggest impediment was the modern day liberal']. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 23, 2019.
*Dibble, Madison (October 23, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/it-was-to-undermine-me-clarence-thomas-slams-democrats-in-upcoming-documentary-on-anita-hill-hearings ‘It was to undermine me’: Clarence Thomas slams Democrats in upcoming documentary on Anita Hill hearings]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved October 23, 2019.
*Frazin, Rachel (October 24, 2019). [https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/467265-clarence-thomas-theres-different-sets-of-rules-for-criticizing-me Clarence Thomas: There's a 'different sets of rules' for criticizing me because I'm conservative]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved October 24, 2019.
*Bleau, Hannah (November 30, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/11/30/clarence-thomas-the-modern-day-liberal-has-been-bigger-impediment-than-klansmen/ Clarence Thomas: The ‘Modern-Day Liberal’ Has Been Bigger ‘Impediment’ than ‘Klansmen’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 30, 2019.</ref>

===Racist smear campaign===
Thomas was the victim of a racially-motivated smear campaign by Democrats. 

Radical [[leftist]]s attempted to block Thomas' nomination to the High Court through a persistent series of public [[guilt by association]] smears.<ref>[http://www.theroc.org/roc-mag/textarch/roc-07/roc07-13.htm ''A Few Facts About Clarence Thomas,''] Chip Berlet, Political Research Associates, Cambridge MA, 1997. [[Chip Berlet]] of [[Political Research Associates]] noted that Thomas was on the editorial board of the ''Lincoln Review'', a quarterly black conservative publication of the Lincoln Institute. Berlet issued a rather dubious ''ad hominem'' attack which claimed "it is a far right group that has worked in coalition with… fascist and anti-Semitic groups," and goes on to "link" Lincoln Institute head J. A. Baker with the Indiana Ku Klux Klan by virtue that Baker is on the board of the Council for National Policy and another board member is supposedly a former Klan member.</ref> Sen. [[Joseph Biden]] agreed to hold a series of [[racism|racially motivated]] hearings dubbed "the [[Anita Hill]] hearings" which have been described as a leftist "high tech [[lynching]] for [[uppidy]] blacks."<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2yfARRF9Co Clarence Thomas Hearings: Biden Questions Thomas 1]</ref>  

In a flagrant violation of the rules of the [[United States Senate|Senate]],<ref>[http://www.loc.gov/rr/law/nominations/thomas/debates.pdf Congressional Record -Senate, 102nd Congress, October 7, 1991], Vol 137, Part 18, p. 25706.</ref> staff members<ref>{{cite web |last1=Brock |first1=David |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150212132454/http://www.uiowa.edu/~030116/153/articles/brock01.htm |title=''The Real Anita Hill'' |work=[[University of Iowa]] |date=March 1992 }}</ref> for a sitting [[Democratic]] member of the Judiciary Committee leaked a routine confidential FBI background report to [[Nina Totenberg]] of [[National Public Radio]] (NPR)<ref>[http://backissues.cjrarchives.org/year/92/1/thomas.asp  The Clarence Thomas Hearings], by William Boot, ''Columbia Journalism Review'', January/February 1992.</ref> which contained a vicious defamatory smear intended to mar Thomas for life. The accusation was known to be false, and was concocted to publicly intimidate an African-American Republican from accepting an appointment to the nation's High Court, and derail his nomination. None of the allegations could be substantiated. The deliberate falsehoods did however persuade former [[Ku Klux Klan]] [[Democrat]]ic [[Senator]] [[Robert Byrd]] to change his vote from "yes" for confirmation to "no".

Liberals have continued to smear Thomas and uncritically believe Hill's claims.<ref>McManus, John F. (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/32174-are-there-no-defenders-of-clarence-thomas Are There No Defenders of Clarence Thomas?] ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref>
===Desperate attacks===

In desperation to attack Justice Clarence Thomas, ''ProPublica'' even recycled old news about him. 
'The site accuses the justice of legal violations—but he was officially cleared more than a decade' earlier.
{{Cquote|The first attack in the left’s spring offensive against the U.S. Supreme Court was an April 6 (2023) ProPublica hit piece about Justice Clarence Thomas. The site quotes “ethics experts” who accuse him of violating federal law by not disclosing trips he had taken with a longtime friend. The accusation turns out to be old news that was adjudicated more than a decade ago.<ref>Mark Paoletta, [https://www.wsj.com/articles/propublica-recycles-old-clarence-thomas-news-trips-crow-judicial-conference-investigation-b9d23640?mod=opinion_lead_pos7 ''ProPublica'' Recycles Old Clarence Thomas News], ''WSJ'', June 4, 2023</ref>}}

==Views on racism==
As a justice, Thomas has strongly opposed [[identity politics]] and believes treating people as individuals, rather than members of an ethnic group, is consistent with the Constitution.<ref>Gerber, Scott Douglas (February 12, 2019). [https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/429700-clarence-thomas-has-had-a-lasting-impact-on-black-history-in-america Clarence Thomas has had a lasting impact on black history in America]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved February 12, 2019.</ref>

ABC News wrote:
{{cquote|He is adamantly opposed to [[affirmative action]], but for entirely different reasons than white conservatives who drive the debate by arguing it's unfair to white people. Thomas says affirmative action instead has hurt blacks. It not only sends them into environments in which they are doomed to struggle instead of soar, but it also perpetuates negative stereotypes that whites hold today that all blacks are inferior to them and don't belong — just as whites in the South assumed 50 years ago.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Greenberg |first1=Jan Crawford |url=https://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=3664143&page=2 |title=Clarence Thomas: A Silent Justice Speaks Out |work=[[ABC]] |date=September 30, 2007 }}</ref>}}

== Personal life ==
Clarence Thomas is married to [[Virginia Lamp Thomas]]. He is "decidedly and unapologetically Catholic."<ref>Berry, Susan (May 19, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/05/19/justice-thomas-decidedly-unapologetically-catholic/ Justice Clarence Thomas: ‘I Am Decidedly and Unapologetically Catholic’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 19, 2018.</ref>

==See also==
*[[Black history]]
* [[Colion Noir]], [[Alfonzo Rachel]], [[Alex Barron]], [[Sheriff]] [[David Clarke]], Dr. [[Ben Carson]], [[Alan Keyes]], [[Reginald Kaigler]] ([[Demcad]]), [[Thomas Sowell]], Clarence Thomas, Conservative [[African American|black]] pundits (See [[:Category:Black Conservatives|Black conservatives]] and [http://africanamericanconservatives.com/about/ AfricanAmericanConservatives.com])

==Further reading==
*Magnet, Myron (2019). [https://www.amazon.com/Clarence-Thomas-Constitution-Myron-Magnet/dp/164177052X ''Clarence Thomas and the Lost Constitution'']. New York: Encounter Books. ISBN 9781641770521.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/clarence_thomas.html ''Clarence Thomas''], [[Real Clear Politics]], October 9, 2007 
*[http://www.hillsdale.edu/hctools/imprimis_archive/2007/10/2007_10_Imprimis.pdf ''A Conversation with Justice Clarence Thomas'']  - [[Hillsdale College]] interview with Justice Thomas conducted in his [[chambers]] at the [[U.S. Supreme Court|Supreme Court]] in [[Washington, D.C.]], on September 19, 2007.

{{Supreme Court|rehnquist=y|roberts=y}}
{{Greatest Thinkers}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Thomas, Clarence}}

[[Category:United States Supreme Court Justices]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Black Conservatives]]
[[Category:Black History]]
[[Category:Best Selling Authors]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]
{{Conservatism}}
[[Category:Pro Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Judicial Restraint]]