5 ms·
This issue is personal for justices Thomas, Jackson, and Sotomayor especially. I think that is reflected in their opinions.
by Georgelemental 3y ago
This issue is personal for justices Thomas, Jackson, and Sotomayor especially. I think that is reflected in their opinions.
- dmvdoug 3y agoSotomayor as well. What fascinates me about Thomas’s dissent is towards the end he talks about HBCUs and how effective they are. You’ll find language of his in a lot of places suggesting black separatist—type sympathies. He was a genuine radical in his college years in that respect, and he’s still clearly sympathetic to sone extent. Cards on the table: I think Justice Thomas has a genuinely nutty jurisprudence. Like way out there nutty. And I disagree with him about virtually everything. But he’s much more complex than the standard caricatures allow for (even when they come from fellow-travelers, like the people who thought Thomas was just Scalia’s lapdog; wrong; Scalia was nakedly unprincipled when compared to Thomas).
- ekam 3y agoYeah he does seem to have a somewhat cohesive and distinct philosophy of his own that undergirds his decisions and that's been underappreciated given his influence over the Court and American jurisprudence
- dmvdoug 3y agoBecause he doesn’t really have any influence. He is locked inside a jurisprudence of one. I suppose I prefer that sort of honest integrity—even though batshit crazy-to the kind of unprincipled, inconsistent but always screechy Scalia.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago> I think Justice Thomas has a genuinely nutty jurisprudence How many other judges routinely cite their own opinion when it was in the minority? I gotta say though I respect the massive the balls to constantly be doing that.