He really should speak (that is, ask questions) more often. Give him credit; the issue at hand is a critical constitutional question; federal vs. state authority with regard to gun rights. Thomas’ reticence has become the stuff of legend. As Tiberius allegedly said at hearing the news of Caesar Augustus’ death…“the Earth will quake!” A Thomas comment during oral arguments is a rare earthquake, LOL.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clarence-thomas-gun-rights_us_56d46b25e4b0871f60ec0c61
A coworker and I wonder if he feels a duty or the freedom to speak now that Justice Scalia is no longer present.
I second what @rosered55 said. He likely felt the need to speak up now after feeling the silence where Scalia would normally jump in.
I think that NOT having heard a WORD from a Supreme Court Justice in nearly a decade is just pathetic.
There is little reason to rejoice now…
jmho.
Scalia wouldn’t allow the lawyers to get in two words edgewise before he interrupted. I’m no fan of Thomas AT ALL, but I do understand his past stated frustration with the Court’s failure to allow the lawyers to actually make an argument, or even to answer the other justice’s questions. But his silence for 10 years was pretty weird!
But anyway, I doubt very much that he jumped in because he “was feeling the silence.” His preference is to let lawyers argue their cases. Maybe he felt that without Scalia there he could actually get answers to his questions (before whereas before Scalia would cut the lawyer’s answers short). Or maybe Scalia had always in the past hit all his questions.
(Just to reiterate, i am NOT a Thomas fan).
There was very limited questioning in this case from the other justices so the attorney for the government was actually going to end her oral argument early. That may be why Thomas decided to jump in as there clearly was extra time for questions. It’s strange, however, that his questions were directed at the constitutional impact of the statute which was expressly excluded as a basis for the case being accepted for review by the Supreme Court. It was up on appeal as a question of statutory interpretation.
I’m wondering if this will be the first of a year-and-a-half’s worth of 4-4 decisions.
The guy doesn’t speak for 10 years, and then speaks shortly after Scalia dies. Too much of a coincidence for me. I suspect (but obviously have no real clue) that Thomas was somehow intimidated by Scalia. Maybe words were exchanged privately 10 years ago.
a court doesn’t need a precedent to set one
I don’t like Thomas at all, but I view this as a good thing. Supreme Court justices should ask questions at oral argument–otherwise, there’s really no reason to have oral arguments, since everything is in the briefs.
I agree they should ask questions but they should also give the lawyers a chance to answer them before cutting them off with the next question that’s not really a question at all.
He didn’t have anything to say yesterday, but the women certainly did. I very much enjoyed this recap of yesterday’s argument by Dahlia Lithwick.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2016/03/in_oral_arguments_for_the_texas_abortion_case_the_three_female_justices.html