Letters to the Editor
-
The Saddest Thing is the Lack of Growth
Clarence Thomas was appointed every bit as much for his age and health as his race. He is still, nearly 16 years into his time on the court, the third youngest justice, barely older than Alito. Clinton's two appointees are much 15 and 10 years older than him.
When you combine that with his incurious mind, he will probably live forever. And that is exactly what his supporters wanted when he was appointed.
I'm eight years younger than Thomas, though only six years behind him graduating law school. When I watched his confirmation hearings, I realized that for the first time there was someone being appointed to the Supreme Court about whom I could say I was more qualified than he. Never discussed Roe v. Wade? The only way that could be true is if you were in a coma when it came out, and remained in one until the confirmation hearings.
And it's just gotten worse. Many justices have changed and learned in their years on the bench, in different directions. Felix Frankfurter was one of the most liberal men in America and became quite a conservative with life tenure. Harry Blackmun and John Paul Stevens moved the other way. But Thomas seems frozen in time, probably the easiest justice's vote to predict in my memory (other than Justice Douglas on tax questions; he also dissented against any case where the government one, without issuing an opinion).
And the man doesn't ask questions from the bench, and doesn't appear to have his attention on oral argument. Judges I've known--of all political stripes--will tell you that oral argument is more important than the briefing, more important than their own reading. It is the quintessential place where appellate judges and appellate advocates can learn from one another (or in the case of Scalia, show off). But Justice Thomas doesn't seem to need oral argument; I guess, if you know the answer before the brief even hits your desk, you don't need to hear from the lawyers either.