I have been a long critic of many of Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinions which often reject basic individual rights while embracing police and national security powers. However, I believe that Thomas is often treated unfairly for being a black conservative on the Court. While others like Justices Alito, Scalia, and Roberts routinely vote along the same lines, Thomas’ race is commonly cited in commentary while that is not a factor in the other justices on the right of the Court. This unfairness was vividly shown by the comments of Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) that Thomas is an “Uncle Tom” and suggested that he was not an authenticate black person. He has refused to retract or apologize of the attack. In the meantime, Democrats are uniformly silent in the face of this uncivil and outrageous attack.
In an interview with CNN, Thompson said that Thomas apparently “doesn’t like black people, he doesn’t like being black.” After raising votes in areas like voting rights, he added that “All those issues are very important and for someone in the court who’s African American and not sensitive to that is a real problem.”
Let’s be clear, I did not view Thomas as someone who was well-suited for the Court. However, many of these justices and their predecessors were on an the top lists of legal experts. They were selected for their lack of prior controversy or other more political factors. What concerns me is that his race is constantly raised by critics. He has every right to be a conservative and has shown a consistent and committed jurisprudence supporting those views. I do not agree with those positions but I fail to see why he should be defined by his race. Indeed, I thought that one of the key objectives of the civil right movement was to allow African Americans to be judged not by the color of their skin. Thomas follows the same interpretive approach as his colleagues — an approach mind you that is not supposed to be based not on a jurist’s personal desires or association with any group. He is not supposed to show loyalty to a particular group or fulfill expectations due to his race. I have no problem with criticizing Thomas for his votes in the same way as we often criticize his colleagues, but he should not face a race test by critics.
Thomas deserves better. I have always been moved by his life’s story. His father was a farm worker and his mother was a domestic worker. They were poor and both descendants of American slaves. The family spoke Gullah as a first language. His mother literally worked for pennies a day and his early life was spent in a home without indoor plumbing. The second of three children, he later lived with his grandparents when they became homeless. Thomas was the only black person at his high school in Savannah and yet was able to remain an honor student. He went on to attend college and Yale Law School. While few seem to want to admit it, that is a remarkable and inspiring life. He developed conservative principles and values in his life. Some find that incomprehensible but his incredible struggle produced a strong personality and will that can be admired even if you strongly disagree with his views.
What concerns me most is the virtual silence from Democrats to denounce this type of race-based attack. Being called an Uncle Tom is obviously deeply offensive to African Americans. Thomas and his family have gone through too much suffering and struggle to be treated so unfairly in my view. The suggestion is that being genuinely black requires you to reach the right conclusions and support the right positions. However, the very struggle that Thompson is describing was a fight to allow black men and women to be treated as individuals and not categorized by the color of their skin. Thompson should apologize and Democrats should show that they are not selectively outraged by race-based attacks.
What do you think?
Source: Washington Post
Paul Schulte:
That is one of my biggest beefs, they gave me a license to drive, renewable in 2020. I laugh my a$$ off every time I think about it. I wouldnt give me a license to drive. In fact I quit driving about a year ago but then I am lucky in that I have people available to drive me around.
Public transportation for the handicapped sucks so I can understand why people are reluctant to give up what is left of their limited mobility.
Byron – my friends took their dads drivers license away a couple of years ago, but then he was 95. He was scary to drive with, even though he did not go far. 🙂 The facility he is in provides transportation to every place they need to go.
feynman:
And I thought President Obama wasnt suited for office because of some of the things he said which are kinda crazy.
I am sure Ben Carson would be the first to admit he isnt perfect. He has his flaws as we all do. Maybe my flaw in regards to him is I havent looked at him hard enough yet. So now I will.
Byron,
It’s not helpful to insert Bundy and Sterling when addressing the matter of Dr. Carson. I can’t locate our remarks, but IIRC you offered what a fine man he is and endorsed his fine character and suitability for elected office.
I think he is not suited for office based on some things he has said which are kinda crazy.
Anyone’s suitability for office is decided, not by you or me, but by the voters.
feynman:
In regard to Ben Carson, so he said something about gay people that I dont believe. The US is becoming like Nazi Germany. Look at what happened to Sterling, he may lose his property for saying something in private. I think what he said is deplorable and it deserves public condemnation but forcing him to sell the team? That is exactly what the Nazis did to the Jews, they forced them to sell their property to non-Jewish Aryans.
Today those people are a little smarter and are using racists rather than a race, we dont have much sympathy for racists in this country. But the underlying principle is the same-brutalize a group of people so that the rest of the population gets in line.
As ridiculous and ignorant as what Sterling said, people ought to be appalled at what has happened to Sterling in regard to being forced to sell the Clippers, I know I am.
Then you have Dana Millbank of the Washington Post saying people who want limited government are racist because of Cliven Bundy. So there you have it, people who think limited government is a good thing are terrible people and are racist scoundrels whom we need to eradicate from our society. A little hyperbole but probably not far off base.
“The anti-government strain of thought that Bundy advanced has been intertwined with racist and anti-Semitic views over several decades. Not all people who resist the authority of the federal government are motivated by race, of course, and not all racists are anti-government. But there is a long symbiosis between the two.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-bundy-saga-reveals-bedfellows-of-bigotry/2014/04/25/1d9700ac-cca1-11e3-93eb-6c0037dde2ad_story.html?wprss=rss_dana-milbank
” But there is a long symbiosis between the two.” Is that any different than what Carson said? Surely he doesnt think all homosexuals are pedophiles anymore than you think all who believe in limited government are racists.
Paul S said: ‘If you live in the West you learn to drive.’
Not if you are blind. Not if you’re disabled. Also, you may have given up driving because you’re elderly and your kids made you.
You see, one of our problems is we think everyone is just like me, or should be just like me. ‘I have a job therefore everyone should have a job’. ‘I have my birth certificate, therefore everyone should have their birth certificate’.
In South Dakota they were giving drivers licences to the blind. And my disabled brother drove and had a licence. A lot of the disabled drive in the West. You should see all the little stickers either in the windows of cars or on the licence plates. If your kids have taken away your licence, always a sad part of growing old, then you still are eligible to vote. If you had a voters ID before it is still good. Even the insane can vote if they want. Just not felons.
Scalia gets blasted here a lot. I chuckle at most of it. However, he is a very self assured guy. He is the only child of a doting Italian family. Being an only child has one of the most profound effects on people. I’m heavily in the nature camp in the nature/nurture debate. But, when it comes to an only child, I swing to the nurture camp.
I suppose that a Congressman could initiate impeachment proceedings of the Honorable Justice Thomas. Since the accuser is a Congressman he could lay off the Radio and go to the floor of Congress and introduce his Bill of Impeachment. I hope he does not employ the word peaches. Isn’t Georgia known as The Peach State? Our roots matter. Listen to Scalia and some of the other accents on the Supreme Court on CSPAN when they have oral argument. One would think you were on a subway in NYC. Scalia was on the radio talking about Obamacare. I cannot fathom why Scalia would care that our President cares about people. Maybe he was saying Obama scare. It is hard to discern words from these New Yorkies. Oh, the fellow inmate here at the nursing home says that Scalia is from New Jersey. Next they will be denigrating Scalia and calling him Grampa Scalia.
Despicable. Thanks for the link, swarthmoremom.
swarthmoremon,
Agreed, and well said.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/winnebago-gop-obama-zebra-donkey Great for GOP minority outreach
I really don’t think the two cases are comparable. One involves a rich old guy and his jealousies concerning his young bi-racial girlfriend. Now she says she was his.archivist so therefore the tapes are legal. The other one involves two african american officials one of whom is elected and the other appointed. Really don’t think the old tit for tat works here.
SWM – If I were her I would say that too, but now TMZ who got the tape is not revealing how they got the tape and supposedly she is saying she did not give them the tape. So, if someone stole the tape and delivered (sold) the tape to TMZ, they would have had to know it had value, which means they would have heard the tape previously. That means, as his archivist she was exposing company or personal secrets or both. TMZ intimates they had worked on the story for a couple of weeks making sure they confirmed it was Sterling on the tape. Sterling was having a private conversation with his gf, which may have been after she was arrested for DUI in one of his autos. There was a black celebrity in the passengers seat, when she was pulled over. We have yet to find out when the conversation took place or under what circumstances.
The outrage should be even greater in the Thomas case since the Congressman called him an Uncle Tom on the radio.
BTW, that is his young black girl friend, just like Obama is our first black President.
Turley said: “I do not agree with those positions but I fail to see why he should be defined by his race. Indeed, I thought that one of the key objectives of the civil right movement was to allow African Americans to be judged not by the color of their skin.”
That’s because you, Mr. Turley, misunderstand the key objective of the civil rights movement and what it means to be Black in America. I’ve been following this blog for a while now and whenever the topic of race comes up, you take the position that the concept of race should just go away and stop making your head hurt. The point of the civil rights movement was not to shed our racial identities and make us all forget that race exists. The point was acceptance.
As long as human beings continue to have eyes we will continue to be aware of the race of others. But the point that you should be taking away from the civil rights movement is that we should acknowledge, appreciate and celebrate each other’s differences – not ignore them as if they don’t exist. They do exist. That’s reality. As a Black man, my skin is different than yours. Doesn’t mean I’m any better or any worse than you – it just means I have a different heritage than yours. I accept and appreciate our diversity because there is much we can learn from each other. But let’s be clear, I wouldn’t want you to shed your heritage because it makes you who you are. Likewise, you shouldn’t ask me to shed mine. And you definitely shouldn’t ask me to shed my heritage just so that you can stop having to think about the concept of race. As I said above, that approach misses the point.
Diversity is a good thing, but before you can celebrate diversity you first have to acknowledge that it exists. This can’t happen if you continue to ignore the racial identity of others.
The Janitor – the question here is whether calling Justice Thomas an Uncle Tom is racist and should be denounced by everyone as a racist attack. Everyone jumped on Don Sterling, even though some thought he was set up and illegally taped. Here we do not have that.
I thought the key objective of the Civil Rights movement was to make everyone equal, not some better than others. Was I wrong?
There has been some discussion about the Ivy League. My view is that we have all these Justices from NY, NJ and almost all from Harvard and Yale. We need regional diversity and definitely law school grads from outside the sainted triangle. When I listen to the oral arguments on CSPAN it gets annoying to hear all these schmucks yakking in “turdy turd and a turd” accents. Uncle Clarence on the other hand is an exception. Although he went to Yale, he has a nice moderate non regional accent. Slightly southern but not very. And he asks so few questions. That is good in a way. There is something wrong when these judges yak so much. Why cant they let the two sides give their spiel and be done with it? I have never seen another appellate court on the planet interrupt so much.
Maybe I was wrong to call Justice Thomas some derogatory name like Uncle Clarence. It is certainly wrong to call him Uncle Tom when his full last name is Thomas. Next thing you know we will be calling Justice Ginsberg something like Aunt Ruth. Scalia would be Uncle Antoni.
I am not going to call Justice Thomas the derogatory name of Uncle Clarence anymore. I was wrong. Sorry. My thoughts were affected by the heat of the night.
We need more civility on this blog.
Paul:
I retrieved your comment:
Folks, Paul’s comment is HERE
NICK SED: “The people here who claim they “love truth” in reality cannot handle the truth when other black people speak it.”
———————————————————–
The irony of this comment astounds me.
BTW: It’s not his conservative views that earn him calumny, it’s his conflict of interest.
The Supreme Court would be immeasurably better preserved as an institution if he were impeached.
When Abe Fortas was nominated by LBJ to be chief justice of the SCOTUS, he had lesser ethical problems than Thomas and he did the honorable thing and RESIGNED from the court. Fortas was a FAR better lawyer and man than Thomas, yet he is still there. It is too bad that we have lost that kind of integrity and concern for the court, above the narrow self-interest of politics.
Help! My comment was caught in the filter.
randyjet
Your friend’s story is a horror. There should have been a lawsuit. I await hearing the outrage from readers of this blog.
NICK sez: “The people here who claim they “love truth” in reality cannot handle the truth when other black people speak it.”
———————————————————————
I am astounded by the irony of this statement.
Nevertheless, I can only say that this is a conversation within the black community, and while us white folks are free to have an opinion, it counts for little in terms of any real meaning.
BTW, I don’t fault Thomas for having a conservative philosophy; I condemn him for taking money from interest groups that appear before the Court; i condemn him for not reporting that income on his financial disclosure forms; i condemn him for making speaking appearances in front of organizations that sponsor cases that are tried before the Court and not recusing himself from those cases.
The institutional integrity of of the Supreme Court would be immeasurably preserved if he were impeached.
You ask for the truth but you really cannot handle the truth when it is put before you.
randyjet,
Sorry. Gotta check.
My note at 10:11 was very sarcastic. Not a bit of sincerity in it. Except for the question about the restricted ballot.
Thanks.
Great article, Annie.
Only 300,000 w/o a photo ID.
And Posner is having second thoughts about his IN decision!
AND, and, WI has no time to get the bill fixed.
I’m heartbroken.