Clarence Thomas

The Honorable Clarence Thomas is an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Justice Thomas is 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 U.S. Constitution for abortion, Roe v. Wade, homosexual rights, federal interference with state sovereignty, the Dormant Commerce Clause and constitutional limits on punitive damages.

Justice Thomas has a straightforward writing style that presents his principled approach in a clear manner. 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 has trained more conservative law clerks than any other Justice.

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.

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.

The most significant difference between Justices Thomas and Scalia is perhaps on the issue of free speech and pornography. Justice 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." Justice Scalia dissented, expressly his view that the government has broader powers under the First Amendment to regulate indecency on cable television.

Justice 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. Justices Scalia, Rehnquist, O'Connor and Breyer dissented.

Justice Thomas tends to oppose government power more often than Justice Scalia does. In a 5-4 decision written by Justice Thomas, from which Justice Scalia dissented, Justice 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. Justice 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."

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.

Early life

He was born in Savannah, Georgia on June 23, 1948.

Appointment to the United States Supreme Court

In 1991, upon the death of Justice Thurgood Marshall, President George H.W. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to fill the newly vacant seat. Supporters of abortion desperately opposed his nomination.

Radical leftists attempted to block Thomas' nomination to the High Court through a persistent series of public guilt by association smears. 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.

In a flagrant violation of the rules of the Senate , staff members for a sitting Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee leaked a routine confidential FBI background report to Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio (NPR) 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 nations High Court, and derail his nomination. None of the allegations could be substantiated. The deliberate falsehoods did however persuade former Ku Klux Klan Democratic Senator Robert Byrd to change his vote from "yes" for confirmation to "no".

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.