Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Tom of Temecula

(1,632 posts)
Fri Jun 21, 2024, 11:53 AM Jun 21

'Corrupt lunatic': Jaws drop at latest Clarence Thomas dissent [View all]

The United States Supreme Court on Friday ruled in an 8-1 vote that the government had the right to restrict access to firearms for alleged domestic abusers. However, there was one notable dissent in the ruling: Justice Clarence Thomas.

As flagged by Slate's Mark Joseph Stern, Thomas argued that all regulations of firearms should be deemed in violation of the Second Amendment "unless it is consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."

Thomas then claimed that there is "not a single historical regulation" that "justifies the statute at issue." Commenting on this, Stern said that Thomas seemed to be arguing that restricting abusers' access to firearms was off-limits because "wife-beating was not generally a crime" at the time of the country's founding in the 18th Century.

Stern was not the only observer to express shock at the logic behind Thomas' ruling. "And Thomas’s dissent is utterly ridiculous and disingenuous," argued former tennis star Martina Navratilova. He is a disgrace to our highest court. Anita Hill should have been believed!!!"


84 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Martina is right about Anita Hill BlueKota Jun 21 #1
Yes. Anita Hill tried to warn us of Thomas and Hillary tried to warn us of Alito. Both were right but here we are Deuxcents Jun 21 #3
...and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford tried to warn about Kavanaugh. TSExile Jun 21 #29
Absolutely 👍 Deuxcents Jun 21 #30
Yup, He's not pretending anymore. Joinfortmill Jun 21 #2
Fuck Long Dong Silver and the Coke can his pubic hair rode in on Blue Owl Jun 21 #4
you mean pindick.... moonshinegnomie Jun 21 #14
LOL Blue Owl Jun 21 #15
Reminds me of an old expression: lavoosh99 Jun 21 #42
THAT alone was overwhelmingly convincing. You can't make shit like that up. That was reality. Evolve Dammit Jun 21 #58
Then by his logic, ALL firearms should be banned MagickMuffin Jun 21 #5
Black Powder Muskets require training, hence, Well Regulated Militia. cayugafalls Jun 21 #16
Yes, 3 words the "originalists" have either ignored Mme. Defarge Jun 21 #34
A "well regulated militia" is DEFINITELY not part of their equation. dchill Jun 21 #68
In the Federalist Papers (#28 & #45) I believe, but I might be off +/- 1 ... aggiesal Jun 21 #36
George Washington himself said, Wednesdays Jun 21 #39
The problem is that it treats an *accusation* as a conviction The Mouth Jun 21 #35
What? I didn't say anything about the accusations MagickMuffin Jun 21 #40
Restraining order, not just accusation Pinback Jun 21 #61
Thank you for the clarification. The Mouth Jun 21 #71
This worries you personally? Because that is not how I read it. Hekate Jun 21 #63
Any infringement of any right in the Constitution, anywhere, for any reason The Mouth Jun 21 #70
Are you allowed to walk around freely in all cases before conviction? edisdead Jun 21 #72
Nope. And that is the standard of evidence for any suspension of any right The Mouth Jun 22 #79
beyond a reasonable doubt? rampartc Jun 22 #82
Walk up to a mental health care professional evaluator (paid to fill beds) and say, "I feel like I wanna die" Attilatheblond Jun 21 #69
The Second Ammendment clearly states: Mr.Bee Jun 21 #53
And women would know what herbs to gather Delmette2.0 Jun 21 #65
Ginni must like it rough. rubbersole Jun 21 #6
Maybe Clarence likes it rough, too. LastDemocratInSC Jun 21 #11
Thomas is trying to motivate TFG's base. Nothing more Raven123 Jun 21 #7
No more big bribes for him Attilatheblond Jun 21 #44
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue Idaho Jun 21 #8
Crow should just don Thomas's robes and take his seat in the SC not fooled Jun 21 #24
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue Idaho Jun 21 #56
He's another one I'd like to see meet his maker... llmart Jun 21 #9
not sure if this is properly defined as 'textualism' or 'originalism' stopdiggin Jun 21 #10
Our nation has a "historical tradition" of preventing black people from owning firearms. thesquanderer Jun 21 #12
Perhaps it's also time to revisit Loving v. Virginia? Abolishinist Jun 21 #21
I believe he is totally onboard with that edisdead Jun 21 #73
You might be right about that! Abolishinist Jun 22 #84
Twenty years from now, law schools are going to have a class on the inappropriate method known as Baitball Blogger Jun 21 #13
You assume we will have any sort of real education 20 years from now. edisdead Jun 21 #74
Corrupt Clearance Thomas is not fit for any bench. Hermit-The-Prog Jun 21 #17
Stephen is determined not to let that billionaire teat dry up. Motor coaches don't fund themselves. Comfortably_Numb Jun 21 #18
Disingenuous? hay rick Jun 21 #19
Yes. He is either petty or stupid. Trust_Reality Jun 22 #81
Last time I looked at the law -- accepting "bribes" was a Federal Crime. Tarzanrock Jun 21 #20
The Justice Dept DENVERPOPS Jun 21 #31
Anita Hill WAS believed. By millions of us. Paladin Jun 21 #22
I believed Dr. Anita Hil --& I really resented the hell out of the way the Senators called him "Judge" &her "Miss Hill" Hekate Jun 21 #64
An MSNBC commentator brought up oasis Jun 21 #23
What's is going to have to happen before we can be rid of him? flying_wahini Jun 21 #25
Beware Traildogbob Jun 21 #27
Soooo, he's also in the NRA's pocket? cbj1958 Jun 21 #26
Welcome To DU ProfessorGAC Jun 21 #52
I feel like this was a foregone conclusion. edisdead Jun 21 #75
so the vote is really 5 to 3/5ths then Clarence JT45242 Jun 21 #28
It wasn't a "crime" because wife beating was legal then. LisaM Jun 21 #32
Funny how "well-regulated" is constantly ignored judesedit Jun 21 #33
Clarence Thomas is Exhibit #1... WestMichRad Jun 21 #37
Thomas needs to retire LetMyPeopleVote Jun 21 #38
Thomas is just a "kicker" in the five-card majority hand dealt us from the stacked deck of the electoral college. jaxexpat Jun 21 #41
He voted however Scalia voted back then Demovictory9 Jun 21 #43
He was a Scalia's legendary ass kisser, for sure. jaxexpat Jun 21 #50
Know what else wasn't a crime in 1789? cactusfractal Jun 21 #45
Okay Uncle Thomas, a black man couldn't be married to a white woman OMGWTF Jun 21 #46
He's one of many that i pray bluestarone Jun 21 #47
im being polite here . snork and humbug . AllaN01Bear Jun 21 #48
I am anxiously waiting for the karmic payback of this jerk ! kimbutgar Jun 21 #49
Master Crow demanded it. pwb Jun 21 #51
Looking Back At The Bump Stock Decision, DallasNE Jun 21 #54
precedent azureblue Jun 21 #55
Unfit to sit on the court. Martin68 Jun 21 #57
uncle thomas... myohmy2 Jun 21 #59
I've never liked the term "originalist" when it comes to interpretation of constitutional law Docreed2003 Jun 21 #60
Clarence would never dare raise a hand or even think of repremanding Ginny. He'd get slapped down so hard by Ginny Traurigkeit Jun 21 #62
Right. The first amendment doesn't allow libel, but the 2nd amendment is a suicide pact. N/T Jacson6 Jun 21 #66
You know what else was illegal at the time? Interracial marriage Pluvious Jun 21 #67
Thomas is the epitome of evil Mysterian Jun 21 #76
Has Doubting Thomas ever done anything at all for black citizens Janbdwl72 Jun 21 #77
He only bows to the history that benefits his warped beliefs. Where are the militias from the 2nd Amendment? usaf-vet Jun 21 #78
Add Thomas and his reasoning to the list of exhibits illustrating "Actual Stupidity" Trust_Reality Jun 22 #80
is he aware of other stuff that wasn't generally a crime back then? Skittles Jun 22 #83
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»'Corrupt lunatic': Jaws d...