How Dare This Man Talk Back?

The photo accompanying this article is one of the nicer depictions liberals have done when discussing the Justice they love to hate--Clarence Thomas. They have publicly prayed for his death, called him a race-traitor and Uncle Thomas, and far, far worse. He happens to be my favorite Justice as the only Justice on the Supreme Court who subscribes to the natural law interpretation of the Constitution (the same theory the Founders used when they wrote the Declaration and the Constitution).

So when Justice Thomas takes a few slaps at his hate-filled critics, I find it delicious. Recently, the loudest wailing has been about Justice Thomas's usual silence during oral arguments, and more particularly his vote with the majority in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission which decided that prohibitions on corporate contributions to political campaigns were unconstitutional. But quite simply, liberals start frothing at mouth at the mere mention of his name, regardless of the issue being discussed. The latest liberal trope is that because of his non-judicial activities at conservative fundraisers, he should have recused himself in Citizens United.

This past Saturday, Justice Thomas hit back during a speech before a Charlottesville, Virginia audience. He was particularly irked by the criticism from liberals about his attendance at a meeting of conservative donors sponsored by the Koch brothers. He also struck back at their criticism of his wife's activities in the Tea Party movement. Suddenly, liberals expect Supreme Court Justices and their spouses to become hermits and withdraw from all public discourse. Oddly, they never have these criticisms of leftist Justices such as Ginsburg and Sotomayor.

Justice Thomas has been taking the vilification rather quietly since his confirmation hearings, which he termed a Democratic "high tech lynching." First he publicly pointed out that his expenses for the Saturday symposium at which he hit back at his critics were paid by the Federalist Society, as an invited guest speaker. [Full disclosure: I am a member of the Federalist Society] The Federalist Society does indeed receive donations from the billionaire Koch brothers, but the vast majority of contributions come from sole practitioners and small law firms. The symposium was not a fundraising event. Inviting Justice Thomas to a symposium by a group that tends to agree with his legal theories does not a conflict make. He could have made exactly the same speech in the rotunda of the Wisconsin capitol, but he probably would have been beaten to death by union thugs.

The liberal POLITICO demanded that Justice Thomas recuse himself in the upcoming legal battles over Obamacare. Definitely a pre-emptive attack. And not on the Justice, but on his wife. "Ginni" Thomas was recently highlighted in a POLITICO article where it was "revealed" that she had formed a lobbying group that uses her experience and connections to help clients with governmental affairs and efforts and political donation strategies. Well, la dee dah. So what? As long as she isn't lobbying the Justices, she is completely free to do so. But POLITICO got breathless pointing out that the Justice "had to amend thirteen years' worth of financial disclosure reports to indicate the sources of his wife's income after Common Cause raised questions about her activities." Well, the fact is that Justice Thomas willingly filled in the blanks for Common Cause even though he was not required to do so by law. More "gotcha" journalism.

But Common Cause was not satisfied with full, if not legally-required, answers. So they sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder (yes, that great defender of law and the Constitution) demanding that the Department of Justice investigate Justice Thomas for conflict of interest (or incompatibility of office, I don't think they know the difference). And earlier in the year, seventy-four Democrats in the House signed a letter asking Justice Thomas to recuse himself from any cases related to Obamacare because of his wife's lobbying.

A great many scholars have come down reluctantly on Justice Thomas's side in the controversy. University of California, Irvine law professor Richard L. Hansen looked into the Koch issue (which also included similar accusations against Justice Antonin Scalia), and concluded that Common Cause's letter was "an unwarranted attack on the ethics of the Justices." Now you would expect to hear that from me. But professor Hansen is an avowed liberal/living Constitutionalist and sharply criticized both Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia in the Citizens United case.

Justice Thomas named no names in attacking his critics, but was clearly angry about the attacks on his wife, and the ridiculous connection they have made from her activities to his decisions. He told the young conservative lawyers at the symposium to "redouble your efforts to learn about our country so that you're in a position to defend it." POLITICO found that very sensible statement to be "ominous." And Justice Thomas then proceeded to have the nerve to introduce his wife to the audience: "My bride is with me--Virginia Thomas. And some of you may know her. But the reason I bring that up is there is a price to pay today for standing in defense of your Constitution. And I think the Constitution is so important it's worth defending." Gee, how radical. How ominous.

He then said ". . . There's going to come a day when you're going to look around and you're going to look at your kids and your grandkids and they're going to ask you a question: What happened to the great country that was here when you grew up, and why isn't it there now, and what did you do?" Amen, Justice Thomas. The completely race-neutral POLITICO wrote out that portion of his speech, mocking his accent by writing "gonna" instead of "going to." Funny how they never do that with the Obamassiah.

His final words at the symposium came from Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. "In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." He told the audience that he has that sign hanging in his Supreme Court chambers. How subversive!

For those of you who would like a bit more information about Justice Thomas, here is the article I did as part of a series on all the sitting Supreme Court Justices: Justice Clarence Thomas.