# Was Clarence Thomas unqualified to be nominated to the Supreme Court? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 20, 2008, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684 "2008-08-20T16:42:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/21 "2008-08-20T18:12:00Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] …Of course, George Bush Sr was full of shit when he said that Clarence Thomas was the “best qualified person” to be on the Supreme Court. He was nominated because he was young and thus would likely be on the bench for decades, because he was extremely conservative, and because he was black (liberals aren’t the only ones who can play the race card) and thus it would be harder for senators to vote against him. [/QUOTE] All true. Don’t forget he was nominated to replace Thurgood Marshall, the first and at that point only black ever to serve on the Supreme Court. It was simply laughable for GHWB to say Thomas’s color was not a factor, and that he was the best qualified person for the post. A good question to ask in these situations: but for the nominee’s color [or other extraneous political consideration], would he be a serious contender for the post? I don’t see how any reasonable, objective observer could say “yes” in Thomas’s case. Thomas was qualified, barely, but there would have been many, many others who were much more so. It must be said that the pool of black conservatives who would pass muster with a Bush White House and with conservative senators was, and is, shallow. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/22 "2008-08-20T18:12:40Z")
[QUOTE=dalej42] Clarence Thomas sexually harassed Anita Hill at the Dept. of Education and the EEOC. He also sexually harassed other women. [/QUOTE] None of this is true. > [@Magiver](#): > > Wow. Just wow. I’ve seen political rants on this board, I’ve seen childish rants on this board. There isn’t even a category for your post. Sure there is - it’s called “tolerance” and “diversity”. See also **Onomatopoeia** ’s bigoted nonsense. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/23 "2008-08-20T18:12:54Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] The fact that he very seldom speaks during oral arguments, and writes the least number of opinions out of all the justices seems to indicate a certain laziness on his part. [/QUOTE] I don’t know that that’s neccearily true. He’s said he doesn’t speak during oral arguments because he considers oral arguments not helpful in his making up his mind…he believes that the legal arguments are generally laid out more completely and coherantly in the legal briefs. And if he writes the smallest number of opinions, it’s probably because he tends to be the most conservative of the justices, and his legal opinions don’t generally get consensus built around them. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/24 "2008-08-20T18:16:17Z")
[QUOTE=Onomatopoeia] Oh, shut the Hell up, Thomas. When, in your entire career, have you not been the white man’s Boy? When have you ever thought for yourself? What different ideas have you EVER had, you loser? You haven’t just kowtowed to the old order, you’ve become the old order’s boot licker, you freak. Perhaps you and that self-hating rhetoritician Alan Keyes should both go and get your skin bleached, as it’s obvious to me that you feel the worst thing in the world is being black, and you’re going to spend the rest of your life making the lives of black people as difficult as you possibly can. Just die already, you animal. [/QUOTE] Justice Thomas thanks you for making his point. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/25 "2008-08-20T18:35:59Z")
[QUOTE=BarnOwl] it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. [/QUOTE] I thought sexually harassing female co-workers _was_ the old order. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/26 "2008-08-20T18:37:00Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] And if he writes the smallest number of opinions, it’s probably because he tends to be the most conservative of the justices, and his legal opinions don’t generally get consensus built around them. [/QUOTE] Don’t dissents count as opinions? If your point holds, then the Justice with the 2nd smallest number of opinions should be the “most liberal” Justice. Is that the case (I honestly have no idea)? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/27 "2008-08-20T19:03:34Z")
[QUOTE=Onomatopoeia] Oh, shut the Hell up, Thomas. When, in your entire career, have you not been the white man’s Boy? When have you ever thought for yourself? What different ideas have you EVER had, you loser? You haven’t just kowtowed to the old order, you’ve become the old order’s boot licker, you freak. Perhaps you and that self-hating rhetoritician Alan Keyes should both go and get your skin bleached, as it’s obvious to me that you feel the worst thing in the world is being black, and you’re going to spend the rest of your life making the lives of black people as difficult as you possibly can. Just die already, you animal. [/QUOTE] Dude, try decaf. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/28 "2008-08-20T19:08:06Z")
Of course Thomas was appointed mainly because of his race. Of course he was not the most qualified for the job. Of course bad things can happen when Republicans play the token game, working from a shallow pool (I remember when J.C. Watts was hailed as the new face of the GOP – he was not terribly ready for prime time). Look at Harriet Miers, whose main qualification seems to have been GWB’s sentimental appreciation of her resemblance to Millie the White House pooch. Of course I suspect that CT said roughly what he was alleged to have said to Anita Hill, and I conclude, BFD. Any delicate snowflake who can’t endure a couple of comments about a pubic hair and a porno movie probably isn’t much of a workplace asset anyhow. Does any of that make him not marginally qualified? I don’t think so. Quantity of opinions doesn’t mean much. Sometimes a lot of opinions just means liking the sound of your own voice. The clerks mostly write or tee them up anyhow, so I’d imagine Thomas could churn out quite a few, if he wanted to, even if he were stupid and lazy. By the way, I found the encomium to RBG pretty funny. Her resume reveals more about political activism than about any real legal skill, and political activism on a one-issue basis at that. An agitator does not necessarily a jurist make. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/29 "2008-08-20T19:46:10Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > The fact that he very seldom speaks during oral arguments, and writes the least number of opinions out of all the justices seems to indicate a certain laziness on his part. > > [QUOTE=Captain Amazing] > I don’t know that that’s necessarily true. He’s said he doesn’t speak during oral arguments because he considers oral arguments not helpful in his making up his mind…he believes that the legal arguments are generally laid out more completely and coherently in the legal briefs. [/quote] Perhaps. But, his silence is so unusual, and so total, that it’s become a national joke. The _Wall Street Journal_ started a “When-Will-Justice-Thomas-Ask-a-Question Watch” in their law blog. February 22, 2008 was the anniversary of Thomas’s last question, marking a record _two years_ of silence, and I haven’t found any reports of him speaking during oral arguments since that date. It’s downright bizarre, and it gives the impression that he’s doing little more than “taking up space”. Incidentally, Thomas wasn’t confirmed by a two-thirds vote. The Senate vote was 52-48, the narrowest margin in over a century. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/30 "2008-08-20T20:38:54Z")
Clarence Thomas is nothing more than Antonin Scalia’s bitch. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/31 "2008-08-20T20:48:12Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] Of course I suspect that CT said roughly what he was alleged to have said to Anita Hill, and I conclude, BFD. Any delicate snowflake who can’t endure a couple of comments about a pubic hair and a porno movie probably isn’t much of a workplace asset anyhow. [/QUOTE] And someone who can’t resist sexually harassing at least three employees is? It wasn’t just a pubic hair, it wasn’t just Anita Hill. What an embarrassment. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/32 "2008-08-20T20:51:42Z")
[QUOTE=Cat Fight] And someone who can’t resist sexually harassing at least three employees is? It wasn’t just a pubic hair, it wasn’t just Anita Hill. What an embarrassment. [/QUOTE] Given that they were working at the EEOC, which is pretty much a do-nothing, unnecessary agency, I suspect the caliber of the talent attracted there was fairly marginal across the board and that the highest standards of professionalism were hardly the norm. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/33 "2008-08-20T20:51:51Z")
He was, at any rate, better qualified than Harriet Miers. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/34 "2008-08-20T21:01:47Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] He was, at any rate, better qualified than Harriet Miers. [/QUOTE] He might well have been the best qualified black far-right Republican who graduated from a decent law school. At least he didn’t get his degree from Liberty, give him that. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2008, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/35 "2008-08-20T21:36:12Z")
[QUOTE=Frostillicus] Clarence Thomas is nothing more than Antonin Scalia’s bitch. [/QUOTE] Except Breyer and Ginsburg end up on the same side of decisions more often than Scalia and Thomas. I think his legal philosophy is generally wrong. But he is a very smart man, and he is one of the few on the Court to get commercial speech right, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Renob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8c91f0/32.png) [@Renob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Renob)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/36 "2008-08-21T15:03:23Z")
[QUOTE=Frostillicus] Clarence Thomas is nothing more than Antonin Scalia’s bitch. [/QUOTE] [Someone who has actually studied](http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009590) the papers of Harry Blackmun and other Supreme Court papers has concluded that this common misperception of Thomas is completely false: > [@](#): > > Immediately upon his arrival at the court, Justice Thomas was savaged by court-watchers as Antonin Scalia’s dutiful apprentice, blindly following his mentor’s lead. It’s a grossly inaccurate portrayal, imbued with politically incorrect innuendo, as documents and notes from Justice Thomas’s very first days on the court conclusively show. Far from being a Scalia lackey, the rookie jurist made clear to the other justices that he was willing to be the solo dissenter, sending a strong signal that he would not moderate his opinions for the sake of comity. By his second week on the bench, he was staking out bold positions in the private conferences where justices vote on cases. If either justice changed his mind to side with the other that year, it was Justice Scalia joining Justice Thomas, not the other way around. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/37 "2008-08-21T15:15:03Z")
Even if I don’t agree with him his opinions are well written, so he’s at least competent in that regard. Or at least his law clerks are. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/38 "2008-08-21T16:53:13Z")
Don’t try to confuse the lefties with the facts, it just makes them irritable. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/39 "2008-08-21T18:22:17Z")
Face it, most are fairly mediocre. None of them are/were especially intelligent (with the exception of Oliver W. Holmes, and Louis Brandeis), and the way the court operates is not conducive to great legal decisions. The fact is the SJC likes to duck really important decisions, like “was the Vietnam war legally started”, or, do states have the power to tax incomes twice, or: do local probate judges violate the Constitution (when they give exclusive rights of property to divorced women). I don’t think Clarence Thomas is especially distinguished, but he is probably as good as most of them. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684/40 "2008-08-21T18:31:32Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] None of them are/were especially intelligent (with the exception of Oliver W. Holmes, and Louis Brandeis) [/QUOTE] Really? Much as I hate his philosophy, Fat Tony is a remarkably intelligent man. From people who have worked with him, I hear the same about Roberts. Ginsburg too is by any standard a very intelligent woman. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-clarence-thomas-unqualified-to-be-nominated-to-the-supreme-court/460684.md?page=3)