4 ms·
It’s worth noting that Clarence Thomas may not actually disagree with any of the rights found in those cases. Thomas has been a long time critic of the use of t
by abduhl 4y ago
It’s worth noting that Clarence Thomas may not actually disagree with any of the rights found in those cases. Thomas has been a long time critic of the use of the due process clause for the finding of substantive rights, and he adhered to the view that these rights should be found under the privileges and immunities clause that has fallen into disuse. He says as much in his opinion, but nobody quotes that part because it’s not a headline grabber. It’s in the same paragraph as the sentence you quote. Thomas has held this view for literally decades.
- anigbrowl 4y agoI'm less preoccupied with what Clarence thomas believes in his heart of hearts than what litigation strategies will be used to exploit his arguments, especially given the emergent trend of states passing 'trigger' legislation pendant on future court decisions. Thomas has indeed held his views for a long time, but then candidates for judicial office (including several who sit on the SCOTUS bench now) have been assuring us that Roe v. Wade was settled law for decades as well. Mind, I also thing the Democrats are at fault for not erecting a legislative framework to put privacy and other rights on a more solid footing when they've had the legislative initiative.
- selimthegrim 4y agoYou meant “privileges or immunities” - “privileges and immunities” is from article IV, not amendment XIV.