Politics - News Analysis
Clarence Thomas Says January 6th Was No Big Deal and Legal Scholars Are Repulsed
Most people know that Supreme Court arguments are not classic arguments in the sense that an attorney stands and makes an impassioned speech on the law.
No, generally speaking, an attorney can expect to get maybe five minutes into their argument and then will spend the rest of their next 30-45 minutes getting peppered with questions by some of the smartest legal minds in the country.
But there is one Justice who was famously quiet, never asking a question. Justice Clarence Thomas once went an entire DECADE without asking a question. He started getting talkative in 2021 when COVID made arguments over the phone. Unfortunately, returning to court hasn’t shut him up.
Today, he might wish he had kept his mouth shut, though, when he heard oral argument over whether Donald Trump should have presidential immunity over January 6th. I leave the actual question to Newsweek, and will then make an extremely impassioned argument myself. then get to the tweets that really nail him.
At one point during the hearing, Justice Thomas asked a lawyer representing the Department of Justice if the federal government has ever charged any other individuals in the past with obstruction of an official proceeding.
Stay up-to-date with the latest news!
Subscribe and start recieving our daily emails.
“There have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings,” Thomas said during the hearing. “Has the government applied this provision to other protests in the past?”
First of all, Justice Thomas should NOT in any way be hearing this case. He should have recused himself based on the fact that his wife encouraged the people to attack the capital. She was there on January 6th.
Second, and one doesn’t need to go to law school to know this, his question isn’t that much different than asking: “There have been many murders in the past, but has the government ever prosecuted a president who murdered someone?
The issue before the court is whether Trump was doing official government business on January 6th and whether Trump acted intentionally to stop Congress’s business – that’s it, those are the only issues to presidential immunity.
Asking about whether the government has ever prosecuted someone during “other protests” is a question for… selective prosecution. Clearly, Thomas thinks that January 6th was just a normal protest and the president can’t be charged for telling people to just protest.
It certainly upset the net:
Ginni Thomas was directly involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Yet Clarence Thomas didn't recuse himself from arguments today in a case about the January 6 insurrection.
How is this not a scandal of epic proportions?
— Robert Reich (@RBReich) April 16, 2024
In oral argument today, Justice Thomas is minimizing the severity of the 1/6 insurrection at the Capitol. Perhaps that's because his wife was part of the conspiracy. What a disgrace that he's sitting on this case. #SCOTUS
— Jeffrey Toobin (@JeffreyToobin) April 16, 2024
Justice Thomas just suggested J6, legally, is no different than any other violent attempt to disrupt official proceedings https://t.co/QGuqWA7GZw
— Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) April 16, 2024
It’s just ridiculous that Thomas is allowed to be on this case. Absolutely corrupt and ridiculous. https://t.co/IjSrQXW1oG
— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) April 16, 2024
Spoken like a man whose wife was conspiring to overthrow the US government. https://t.co/BCp8RcmLIG
— Ruth Ben-Ghiat (@ruthbenghiat) April 16, 2024
Clarence Thomas made it to work today just so he could defend his own wife.
The Supreme Court is thoroughly compromised. https://t.co/oxT3Bpv30S
— Renee (@PettyLupone) April 16, 2024
It’s positively, criminally nuts that this guy sits on this case when his wife was actively involved in trying to overturn the election. https://t.co/ZTiEjtHd6A
— Glenn Byres (@GlennByres) April 16, 2024
That Justice Thomas, whose spouse at the very least supported and helped organize elements that were used in Trump’s coup attempt, has not recused from this case, is a sign of his utter corruption. https://t.co/g9p41Ly06s
— Jon Cryer (@MrJonCryer) April 16, 2024
How absolutely despicable that Clarence Thomas refuses to recuse himself from all cases involving the Jan 6 insurrection just to minimize the severity of it since his domestic terrorist wife Ginni Thomas helped to orchestrate it. Both should be arrested, prosecuted and convicted.
— Ricky Davila (@TheRickyDavila) April 17, 2024
Bringing this back up to show you this outraged Clarence Thomas but not the Jan 6. Insurrection his wife is tied to. https://t.co/BHmGJxkmq5
— Adam Parkhomenko (@AdamParkhomenko) April 17, 2024
It’s an absolute disgrace that Clarence Thomas is allowed to sit on any #SCOTUS hearing ANYTHING about #January6thInsurrection!
Ginni Thomas undisputedly had some part in this.
He doesn’t have the integrity to recuse himself – Chief Justice Roberts MUST act!
#WagnerTonight pic.twitter.com/kR3LqoCVqk
— Kemu 🇺🇸🇺🇦🇮🇱☮️🇵🇸🟦🟧 (@kemu808) April 17, 2024
****
Jason Miciak is Executive Editor of Political Flare and an Editor at Large for Occupy Democrats. He can be reached at [email protected]
Comments
Comments are currently closed.