| Line 8: |
Line 8: |
| | == Comparison with Justice Scalia == | | == Comparison with Justice Scalia == |
| | | | |
| − | Justice Thomas is most often compared to Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], as both support overturning ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''. But these Justices have significant differences. For example, Justice Scalia typically rejects the use of legislative history more often than Justice Thomas does. Justice 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 Justice Thomas does not reject a constitutional right of parents.<ref>''See, e.g.'', [[Troxel v. Granville]] (2000).</ref> | + | Justice Thomas is most often compared to Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], as both support overturning ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''. But these Justices have significant differences. For example, Justice Scalia typically rejects the use of legislative history more often than Justice Thomas does. Justice 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 Justice 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> |
| | | | |
| | Justice 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), Justice 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, Justice Thomas felt that the federal government lacked the power to interfere with state sovereignty over this intrastate activity. Justice Scalia, in contrast, joined the majority of the Court in upholding application of federal law to destroy marijuana plants grown lawfully under California law. | | Justice 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), Justice 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, Justice Thomas felt that the federal government lacked the power to interfere with state sovereignty over this intrastate activity. Justice Scalia, in contrast, joined the majority of the Court in upholding application of federal law to destroy marijuana plants grown lawfully under California law. |
| Line 19: |
Line 19: |
| | | | |
| | Justice Thomas is more likely than Justice Scalia to enforce a statute that is wrong as a matter of policy, as Justice 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> | | Justice Thomas is more likely than Justice Scalia to enforce a statute that is wrong as a matter of policy, as Justice 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> |
| | + | |
| | + | Justice 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 he overruled.<ref>Morse v. Frederick, 127 S. Ct. 2618, 2630 (2007) (Thomas, J., concurring).</ref> Neither Justice Scalia nor any other [[conservative]] has yet supported this position of Justice Thomas. |
| | | | |
| | == Former Clerks == | | == Former Clerks == |