Headlines

Adam Winkler

Clarence Thomas 2012?

Unlike the flip-flopping Mitt Romney, Thomas is a true conservative who could appeal to all of the segments of the Republican coalition. Tea Partiers would see Thomas as one of their own. Not only has he been a consistent voice to curtail the power of the federal government but his wife Ginni, a Tea Party activist herself, has been a leader in the fight to repeal Obama’s healthcare reform law. Wall Street Republicans would be buoyed by Thomas’s opposition to environmental regulation and his free market philosophy. Blue-collar workers could embrace Thomas’s up-by-his-bootstraps story of rising from incredible poverty–until he was 7, his home had no indoor plumbing–and his votes to end affirmative action and preserve the Second Amendment. Evangelicals will like that he’s against abortion, gay rights, and limits on prayer in school.

Thomas is also very smart. When he first joined the Supreme Court, some people thought he would just mimic Justice Antonin Scalia, the intellectual leader of the Court’s conservative wing. Over the years, however, Thomas has become a powerful voice for his brand of constitutional conservatism and has proven himself a more devout believer in originalism than even Scalia. Today, it seems as if Scalia is more likely to follow Thomas.

Although known for his silence on the bench—he hasn’t asked a question during oral argument in several years—Thomas is outgoing and charming off the bench.

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Wow, another article with no basis in reality written so some writer could collect his paycheck.

Blake on February 26, 2012 at 10:58 AM

No! We need him on the bench!

Rational Thought on February 26, 2012 at 10:58 AM

While I don’t agree with Clarence Thomas about everything, that would be so F’ing awesome.

Ginni for AG!

Random on February 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM

How can we afford to take him off the bench?

Browncoatone on February 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM

How can we afford to take him off the bench?

Browncoatone on February 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM

He doesn’t have to quit his job to run. Then if he wins he can appoint his own replacement.

Rebar on February 26, 2012 at 11:03 AM

I like Thomas. But seriously, the only person I can think of that might have a burning desire for to him to run would Anita Hill, who has prolly burned through all her “speaker fees.”

apostic on February 26, 2012 at 11:04 AM

But seriously, the only person I can think of that might have a burning desire for to him ….

Count me in as +1 for Thomas, provided he doesn’t quit his seat to run (and he doesn’t have to).

Random on February 26, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Yet one of the biggest downsides of Lat and Hill’s proposal–that Thomas would have to resign from the Court to run, thereby permitting President Obama to replace him with a more liberal justice–no longer applies with the same force. If drafted at the convention at the end of August, Thomas would still have to resign. Nevertheless, Republicans in the Senate could plausibly justify a filibuster of any Obama nominee on the ground that the seat should be filled by whoever wins the White House in November, two months later. And then they’d keep their fingers crossed that Thomas would be that person.

This may be the worst plan I have ever heard.

Kataklysmic on February 26, 2012 at 11:06 AM

“Yet one of the biggest downsides of Lat and Hill’s proposal–that Thomas would have to resign from the Court to run”

Hm. Does he?

Random on February 26, 2012 at 11:10 AM

After two pretend black presidents, he would be a real breath of fresh air. I would love for Justice Thomas to appoint the next 3-4 justices, but it’s a ridiculous idea.

flyfisher on February 26, 2012 at 11:13 AM

The libs would vote for him just to get him off the court.

Tomolena1 on February 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Stay where you are CT

cmsinaz on February 26, 2012 at 11:20 AM

He’d be nuts to do it. He has a good gig.

jeanie on February 26, 2012 at 11:21 AM

I LOVE Clarence Thomas. But he is most definitely needed on the bench, as he is the court’s moral and intellectual compass.

How about Thomas Sowell ’12?

Rixon on February 26, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Today, it seems as if Scalia is more likely to follow Thomas.

I LOL’d.

Thomas is a conservative judicial activist, Scalia is anti-activist, so they have completely different judicial philosophies.

Scalia doesn’t follow anyone. The reason liberals demonize him so much is that he is a powerful ideological enemy to their goal of establishing a liberal activist court.

kaltes on February 26, 2012 at 11:23 AM

What kind of judges would he nominate?

/

artist on February 26, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Why would he have to step down? Governors, senators, and representatives don’t, and if they lose they go back to that job.

SouthernGent on February 26, 2012 at 11:40 AM

The guy is a judge – not a politician. He has never appeared political to me in the least. Why even float this idea out? This is just stupid. He’s got a great job now.

Blake on February 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM

The guy is a judge – not a politician. He has never appeared political to me in the least. Why even float this idea out? This is just stupid. He’s got a great job now.

Think of the debates: Obama just babbling on, asking this rhetorical question and that question. Thomas silently bemused.

Random on February 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Plowing up this snake just when bhocare is to be brought up in the SC? I dearly love Justice Thomas, but we can not have bho put any one else on the SC if in fact Thomas would have to quit!
L

letget on February 26, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Thomas for President! What’s that you say, we don’t have a clue what Thomas’s policy prescriptions might be? And we don’t know anything about his politics? That’s OK, this is for the Daily Beast so I’m not too worried about quality control.

wte9 on February 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Justice Thomas could never win, sadly. He would be utterly demonized by the Left, though I’m sure he would make an excellent president. Thomas’s judicial philosophy is focused on natural rights and interpreting the Constitution through the light of our principles as best articulated in the Declaration of Independence. A return to this method of thought, especially in lawmaking, would do our country enormous good.

Justice Thomas is sometimes labeled as a judicial activist because he doesn’t seem as willing to follow precedent as some. I like that. Following precedent all the time can get us some really, really horrible judicial decisions. Stare decisis (precedent) makes sense only when the precedent makes sense, and should be followed, yes, but only when it follows the principles of natural law that our Republic is founded upon. Scalia is a textualist, and he has loyalty primarily to the text of a law. His and Thomas’s approaches often reach the same conclusions if only because both philosophies are rather commonsensical compared to those of the more liberal justices.

I hope Justice Thomas has many more years on the Supreme Court.

Othniel on February 26, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Lots of vile Leftist Love for CT in the Comments at the link:

By the way, do you know where Clarence Thomas would be today without all those “lib’rul” civil rights policies that he and the Repukes are always attacking?

He wouldn’t be a lawyer. He wouldn’t be a judge or a Supreme Court justice. He would be sweeping the floor somewhere in Pinhead. Georgia.

This ignorant, bitter, self-hating, sexual harassing, affirmative action case would make Herman Cain look like a political and intellectual genius. Bring ‘im on!

And he’s ugly as all get out!!

Uncle Tom (deleted)–please, he wouldn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell–and YOU know it

His wife Virginia is filled with to much hate for Democrats and President Obama at least the other Republican candidates ladies know how to keep their mouths closed in public, she couldn’t.

As the first order of President, I will insist that every American is given one can of coke with my personal pube on it. Bottoms up!

Angry little Cretins, aren’t they?

Del Dolemonte on February 26, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Terrible idea, the Senate confirmation hearing nightmare that he went through, X 10 all over again. No way he would be interested.

slickwillie2001 on February 26, 2012 at 12:35 PM

I’m more in line with Scalia philosophically, but Thomas is a great man. We need him to stay on the bench: SCOTUS is just as important, if not more important than winning the Presidency.

letoile du nord on February 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Thomas is the guy you make VP if a republican president or VP passes away in office, his seat must be replaced by a conservative. Just look at the Canadian article posted about parents being arrested for their children drawing a gun. The courts matter.

cpaulus on February 26, 2012 at 1:35 PM

The problem is that running for Prez now requires hyperactive egomaniacs. Who in their right mind would want to go through that, for anything? It’s almost to the point that anybody who can successfully do the campaign is too crazy to do the job.

Thomas isn’t crazy, at all, though he would make a fine President. Why are conservatives playing this race game, though?

jodetoad on February 26, 2012 at 2:05 PM