The court is expected to weigh in next session on same-sex marriage, which it legalized in 2015

Settled legal precedent in the US is not “gospel” and in some instances may have been “something somebody dreamt up and others went along with”, the US supreme court justice Clarence Thomas has said.

Thomas – part of the conservative supermajority that has taken hold of the supreme court over Donald Trump’s two presidencies – delivered those comments Thursday at the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law in Washington DC, ABC News and other outlets reported. His remarks preceded the nine-month term that the supreme court is scheduled to begin on 6 October.

“I don’t think that … any of these cases that have been decided are the gospel,” Thomas said during the rare public appearance, invoking a term which in a religious context is often used to refer to the word of God. “And I do give perspective to the precedent. But … the precedent should be respectful of our legal tradition, and our country and our laws, and be based on something – not just something somebody dreamt up and others went along with.”

top 55 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 169 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 101 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Just a reminder that this fucker sexually harassed Anita Hill for years.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 80 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It won't be precedent. It will be amount of RVs donated.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 68 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    "precedent" was destroyed in 2022. The Supreme Court are just tools of the christian cult. They have destroyed American law.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    American law is as stable as a house of cards when half the country would rather base the law on presumptions of what 18th century white supremacists might have preferred to the needs of Americans in the 21st century...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So wouldn't this mean that past SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant to new cases? So people could legitimately keep bringing near-identical cases to the SCOTUS level and have a legitimate expectation for them to be decided? That sounds obviously unwise even by current SCOTUS standards.

    Mind you, Thomas probably wants to go by a rule of "precedent matters when I say it does", so consistency is irrelevant.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago*

    I think to a degree it's never mattered. If the composition of the Supreme Court has changed enough, then they just come up with their own ad-hoc justification to make new rulings over old cases. Before her death, I remember RBG was encouraging the public to bring new cases regarding older rulings.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    A lot of words for "I don't like it"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago

    Clarence Thomas is the kind of man who after spending 12 years a slave would go out and hunt runaway slaves for his own new land.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    I have completely lost all confidence in our government.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago

    Just Clarence Thomas doing Clarence Thomas things.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ok, then when trump leaves and a democrat packs the court, then who gives a fuck? It’s not like the number of judges is gospel or anything. Or an age limit, again if we’re not going to follow the rules then who fucking cares

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    As much as I want it, I don't think the Democrats will ever be willing to pack the court. -and that makes me a little depressed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    The last time they had the chance, polling told them Americans wouldn't be happy so they left it alone.

    It's neat how they pay attention to what Americans want when it's the politically easy thing to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Ok so how do the citizens pull him out of that office?

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    There are ways to remove a supreme Court justice, however given the political landscape the only practical way he's leaving is through his death.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    Well, we've tried ballot box, soap box, and jury box. What's left?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    He’s too good for that, fucking plywood

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    Not like precedent was a large reason for rulings from this court so far.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Fun fact, Clarence Thomas' reaction to Samuel L Jackson in Django Unchained was, "Sam's getting soft in his old age."

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago
    [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    So gay marriage is out, what else will they be hearing this session? It’s gonna get so much worse, I’m sure.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Yeah we got a bunch of analysts telling us a few months ago, no they'll leave that one alone. lol sure they're gonna take Roe, but not Obergefell? They just have to have the balls to write the goddamn thing, putrid as it will be, and god knows he's got 'em.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Euphemism for " expect some crazy illegal shit to happen"

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago
    [–] 25 points 1 year ago

    Why start respecting 200 years of norms in American law now?

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago

    Don't forget:

    A big reason Thomas is a SC judge is Biden ran a sham confirmation hearing for his "good buddies across the aisle"....

    https://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/biden-anita-hill-women-senate-clarence-thomas-213864

    When Biden bitched and moaned about how it wasnt like "the good ole days" is because back then he was at best a useful idiot, if not outright intentionally helping the far right religious extremists who now run the GOP.

    Decades of neoliberalism is coming home to roost with trump. A real party never would have let them set all this shit up over the decades.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Like the law matters to anyone in 2025

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Precedent is important, but it's superseded by whether or not the plaintiff has taken Thomas on vacation recently.

  • source
  • The precedent is the legal tradition you pompous buffoon (Thomas not OP)

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Constitutional Law Professors right now

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    The Krusty the Clown of justice.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Clarese Dumbass should've been canned years ago

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I mean we already know that because that’s what they’ve been doing for several years now

  • source
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago*

    No reason to care what the state thinks about your marriage. You can still get married without the states involvement. Just have a ceremony and stuff. The only downside is that trans women can't have children and be in a marriage as a business partnership, but trans women can't have kids anyways, so it doesn't matter. Outside of having children, legal marriage is not a good deal. It really only exists in its good form to protect the interests of women who may wish to have children in a relationship. If you really want to you can enter into a contract with someone to split your assets as one body for the duration of the partnership or marriage, so you can specialize without taking all the risk, and then just get married anyways while giving the middle finger to these bigots.

  • source
  • 25 comments in c/usnews@beehaw.org view that post
    17 comments in c/world view that post
    10 comments in c/conservative@sh.itjust.works view that post