Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas: no questions in 2 years (and 144 cases, Justice Thomas has refrained from oral argument)
AP on Yahoo ^ | 2/25/08 | Mark Sherman - ap

Posted on 02/25/2008 2:27:59 PM PST by NormsRevenge

WASHINGTON - Two years and 144 cases have passed since Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas last spoke up at oral arguments. It is a period of unbroken silence that contrasts with the rest of the court's unceasing inquiries.

Hardly a case goes by, including two appeals that were argued Monday, without eight justices peppering lawyers with questions. Oral arguments offer justices the chance to resolve nagging doubts about a case, probe its weaknesses or make a point to their colleagues.

Left, right and center, the justices ask and they ask and they ask. Sometimes they debate each other, leaving the lawyer at the podium helpless to jump in. "I think you're handling these questions very well," Chief Justice John Roberts quipped to a lawyer recently in the midst of one such exchange.

Leaning back in his leather chair, often looking up at the ceiling, Thomas takes it all in, but he never joins in.

Monday was no different. Thomas said nothing.

He occasionally leans to his right to share a comment or a laugh with Justice Stephen Breyer. Less often, he talks to Justice Anthony Kennedy, to his immediate left.

Thomas, characteristically, declined to comment for this article. But in the course of his publicity tour for his autobiography, "My Grandfather's Son," the 59-year-old justice discussed his reticence on the bench on several occasions.

The questions may be helpful to the others, Thomas said, but not to him.

"One thing I've demonstrated often in 16 years is you can do this job without asking a single question," he told an adoring crowd at the Federalist Society, a conservative legal group.

The book tour showed that the topic comes up even among friendly audiences.

Indeed, Thomas' comment was provoked by this question: Why do your colleagues ask so many questions?

His response: "I did not plant that question. That's a fine question. When you figure out the answer, you let me know," he said.

The typical hourlong argument session can sometimes be difficult, even for a practiced questioner.

"I really would like to hear what those reasons are without interruption from all of my colleagues," Justice John Paul Stevens said at an argument in the fall.

The newest justice, Samuel Alito, has said he initially found it hard to get a question in sometimes amid all the former law professors on the court.

The last time Thomas asked a question in court was Feb. 22, 2006, in a death penalty case out of South Carolina. A unanimous court eventually broadened the ability of death-penalty defendants to blame someone else for the crime.

In the past, the Georgia-born Thomas has chalked up his silence to his struggle as a teenager to master standard English after having grown up speaking Geechee, a kind of dialect that thrived among former slaves on the islands off the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts.

He also has said he will ask a pertinent question if his colleagues don't but sees no need to engage in the back-and-forth just to hear his own voice.

Lately, he has focused on the latter reason.

"If I think a question will help me decide a case, then I'll ask that question," he told C-SPAN's Brian Lamb in October. "Otherwise, it's not worth asking because it detracts from my job."

He talked in that same interview about descriptions of him as the silent justice.

"I can't really say that it's unfair to say that I'm silent in that context. I would like to, though, be referred to as the 'listening justice,' you know," Thomas said. "I still believe that, if somebody else is talking, somebody should be listening."

The following month, however, at an event sponsored by Hillsdale College in Michigan, Thomas was more combative when asked about oral arguments.

Suppose surgeons started discussing the merits of removing a gallbladder while in the operating room, Thomas said, as quoted by U.S. News & World Report. "You really didn't go in there to have a debate about gallbladder surgery," he said. Similarly, "we are there to decide cases, not to engage in seminar discussions."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: clarencethomas; justice; justicethomas; questions; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 02/25/2008 2:28:00 PM PST by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Promote this man to Chief Justice!


2 posted on 02/25/2008 2:29:58 PM PST by Revolting cat!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

As long as the information is all being presented I see no reason for him to ask questions.


3 posted on 02/25/2008 2:31:22 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I agree with Thomas. I have heard the audio of a few cases and sometimes wish that the blowhards would just shut up and listen.

Geechee...there is a word I haven’t heard in a while.


4 posted on 02/25/2008 2:31:35 PM PST by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I guess the AP is more impressed with incoherent questions from Ruth Bader Ginsberg. She must truly be an embarrassment to the others on the Court.

ML/NJ

5 posted on 02/25/2008 2:32:25 PM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Experienced appellate attorneys know that oral argument is almost always a formality. With 9 Supreme Court Justices and their cadres of clerks, plus the parties and their briefs, and all the amicus briefs, the chances that you are going to think of something new in oral argument is miniscule.

In a tiny fraction of cases something interesting may be conceded or a point made clearer, but generally Thomas is exactly right; they are there to decide, not teaching a law 101 seminar for the reporters.

6 posted on 02/25/2008 2:33:17 PM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

An educated man that doesn’t love to hear himself talk is a rare thing.


7 posted on 02/25/2008 2:36:04 PM PST by SampleMan (We are a free and industrious people, socialist nannies do not become us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Yawn. In the history of the Court, some justices have been rather talkative while others have been almost silent during oral argument. It doesn’t tell us much about the justice at all.


8 posted on 02/25/2008 2:38:27 PM PST by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

I am going to add another item to my list of things I want to do in my lifetime....Meeting Justice Thomas is it!


9 posted on 02/25/2008 2:39:26 PM PST by goodnesswins (Being Challenged Builds Character; Being Coddled Destroys Character)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
An educated man that doesn’t love to hear himself talk is a rare thing.

I was saying the same thing to my family and friends just yesterday. ;)

10 posted on 02/25/2008 2:41:57 PM PST by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Questions are mainly used to influence movement on a position by other Judges. Thomas already knows who is going to vote with him, and the rest are not touchable by him. Knowing this, he remains silent. Thomas and Scalia are the most conservative members. Scalia loves to mix it up even though he knows he will not convert anyone. Thomas does not bother.

If Obama or Clinton nominates 3-6 new Judges to the Court, which is very possible, the conservative movement will be severely damaged for 25 to 30 years. Several Democratic Justices will retire quickly upon election of a Democrat. If McCain is elected, they will try to wait him out, hoping he is a one-termer. McCain would probably get 1-2 nominations in one term. The Court can be expected to remain basically status quo under McCain.

11 posted on 02/25/2008 2:44:43 PM PST by SaxxonWoods (If you don't vote, you don't matter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Everyone should read Justice Thomas' memoir, My Grandfather's Son. It is a wonderful story of someone growing up under hard conditions, attaining high moral values and an appreciation for the nation's political history, particularly as it relates to the importance of limited government.

Of course, prepare to be outraged upon being reminded of the high-tech lynching administered to Justice Thomas by the elite liberal corrupt hypocrites in the U.S. Senate and their various support groups. However, the outrage is quickly replaced by satisfaction in the result and admiration for Justice Thomas himself, who refused to back down from the attack and showed the likes of Kennedy and Biden they had picked the wrong victim. He did not bother to try to hide his disdain for the cowardly bullies of the Judiciary Committee.

I am proud to have hanging on my wall a letter I received from Justice Thomas in reply to one I sent him. He not only took the time to thank me, but he included a lengthy hand written note addressing specific points I had made about the importance grandparents can play in a person's life. He wrote, "I deeply appreciate your kind and thoughtful letter...", and he went on to state his thoughts on the matters relating to grandparenting which I had brought up.

I do not know if Clarence Thomas will ever be accorded the respect he has earned as the pre-eminent role model for young Americans of every race, but I do know that the constant attacks and innuendo as represented by this article will never cease. He is too much proof of the fallacy of everything liberals stand for for them to ever leave him alone, but he is too much of a man to ever be cowed by them.

12 posted on 02/25/2008 3:00:17 PM PST by San Jacinto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Most of the time when I see questions printed from the other Supremes (read: the Left-wing ones) they are not questions but statements disguised as questions.


13 posted on 02/25/2008 3:01:19 PM PST by VeniVidiVici (Benedict Arnold was against the Terrorist Surveillance Program)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
I am going to add another item to my list of things I want to do in my lifetime....Meeting Justice Thomas is it!

That would indeed be an honor, but at least write him. I think he appreciates knowing we are out here (see my previous post).

14 posted on 02/25/2008 3:03:18 PM PST by San Jacinto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

He’s the “Quiet Man” of the Supreme Court.


15 posted on 02/25/2008 3:07:06 PM PST by nygoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

The little bit I have seen about the “questions” asked by the other SCOTUS justices suggests to me that there is mostly a lot of posing and posturing, with some playing to the larger public via pompous leftist “reporters” such as Linda Greenhouse. [Scalia is the exception since virtually anything he has to say is always worth hearing and thinking about!]


16 posted on 02/25/2008 3:07:19 PM PST by Enchante (Democrats: we'll send Pelosi and Brezinski to Damascus, that's our foreign policy!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: San Jacinto

Thanks, I will.


17 posted on 02/25/2008 3:23:17 PM PST by goodnesswins (Being Challenged Builds Character; Being Coddled Destroys Character)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
My Uncle was a big time steel erection construction man (cover of the industry magazine 5 times); he was on his church building committee and was asked why he never said anything even though he was the most qualified on the committee to speak - he said, “If you ever say anything I disagree with or which is not correct, I will let you know”.
18 posted on 02/25/2008 3:36:01 PM PST by SF Republican (Conservatives wanted all or nothing, and they got it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

16 years??? I must be getting old. It seems like only the other day that Coke cans and literary references were in the news.


19 posted on 02/25/2008 3:43:06 PM PST by geopyg (Don't wish for peace, pray for Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I absolutely adore this man. I caught his book party on C-SPAN at another Justice’s home, and the sheer humanity and dignity of the man greatly impressed me. God bless Clarence Thomas and may he live a long and happy life.


20 posted on 02/25/2008 3:45:29 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson