149
submitted 3 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Summary

Clarence Thomas criticized the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for ignoring Supreme Court precedent in a case involving David Smith, convicted of attempted murder, whose sentence was overturned due to procedural concerns.

Thomas argued the court violated the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act by re-evaluating evidence rather than deferring to previous rulings.

Critics highlighted Thomas’s hypocrisy, noting his role in overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, disregarding decades of precedent and leading to abortion bans in over 20 states.

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 45 points 3 weeks ago

Clarance respectfully go fuck yourself.

[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago

He can disrespectfully fuck himself, too.

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

With a very rusty pitchfork.

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago

He can fuck off and die. Painfully, publicly, soon, and slowly.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 5 points 3 weeks ago

Nah, he can live until the current nightmare is over, then he can fuck off and die.

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago

He's upset they followed his precedent.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 17 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah? So who's going to do anything about it?

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

Corruption just keeps on working without consequence.

400 million temporarily embarrassed swindlers.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

I think it's safe to say Americans are now permanently embarrassed.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You can never tell with Thomas if he's been bribed in advance or is soliciting a gratuity.

[-] tal@lemmy.today 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Thomas’s hypocrisy

looks at article

He's talking about a lower court not following a Supreme Court precedent.

The Supreme Court is able to overrule Supreme Court precedent in later cases. It happens only rarely, but it does happen. There's a list of such rulings somewhere I remember on Wikipedia, several pages. Roe v. Wade was one such example.

But lower courts are not supposed to do that.

goes looking for Wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions

This is a list of decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States that have been explicitly overruled, in part or in whole, by a subsequent decision of the Court. It does not include decisions that have been abrogated by subsequent constitutional amendment or by subsequent amending statutes.

As of 2018, the Supreme Court had overruled more than 300 of its own cases.[1]

[-] barkingspiders@infosec.pub 7 points 3 weeks ago

Thank you for posting the wiki article, and regardless of how hypocritical this specific headline actually is, fuck Clarence Thomas for all the other reasons too. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/releases/durbin-reveals-omissions-of-gifted-private-travel-to-justice-clarence-thomas-from-harlan-crow

[-] PapaSkwat@lemy.lol 7 points 3 weeks ago

Precedent died in 2016. It means less than nothing now.

[-] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

Clarence Thomas is a bribe accepting crooked hypocrite who falls to pieces the second the doesn't get what he wants. How is this news? I thought everyone knew that already?

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

Not to mention Chevron deference. Thomas can get wrecked.

this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2025
149 points (99.3% liked)

News

25243 readers
1608 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS