Clarence Thomas breaks long silence during Supreme Court oral arguments
Source: Washington Post
Thomas seemed to be making a light-hearted joke about lawyers trained at his alma mater Yale Law School or its rival, Harvard. But several justices were speaking and laughing at the time, and the court reporter lost Thomass comments during the cross talk.
His comments came during questions about the qualifications of lawyers who had represented a Louisiana man in a murder case. Justice Antonin Scalia noted that one of the lawyers had attended Harvard and another had gone to Yale.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clarence-thomas-breaks-long-silence-during-supreme-court-oral-arguments/2013/01/14/a7c6023c-5e7a-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html
I always say nothing helps break the tension of a capital murder case like some well-timed humor...
TheCowsCameHome
(40,167 posts)It isn't like CokeCanClarence to utter anything intelligible.
rocktivity
(44,572 posts)Special Achievement Category!
rocktivity
niyad
(113,049 posts)considered news.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)[img]]/img]
Wolf Frankula
(3,598 posts)After all, 'It is better to be silent and to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.'
Wolf
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)I'll bet he's the life of party at cocktail happenings!
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)What a lightweight.
blueclown
(1,869 posts)Sums up Mr. Thomas' legal philosophy quite succinctly..
DreamGypsy
(2,252 posts)From the New York Times report:
The official transcript confirms that Justice Thomas spoke, for the first time since Feb 22, 2006. It attributes these words to him, after a follow-up comment from Justice Scalia concerning a male graduate of Harvard Law School: Well he did not . That is all the transcript recites.
Though the transcription is incomplete, people in the courtroom understood him to say that a law degree from Yale may actually be proof of incompetence.
<snip>
And the lawyer at the lectern, a Louisiana prosecutor named Carla S. Sigler, responded, I would refute that, Justice Thomas, indicating that the justice had articulated a proposition capable of refutation. Ms. Sigler had said earlier that the Yale lawyer was a very impressive attorney.
Paladin
(28,243 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)In the documentary "Anita," which premieres at the Sundance Film Festival in four sold-out screenings beginning Saturday, Academy Award-winning filmmaker Freida Mock focuses her lens on law professor Anita Hill (who hadn't yet seen the film at press time). More than 20 years after Hill accused then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment in turbulent Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Hill is an author, professor of social policy, law and women's studies at Brandeis University's Heller School of Social Policy and Management and a frequent speaker on sexual discrimination and civil rights.
Was it worth it "it" being the hard times you went through because of the hearings and the aftermath? Looking at it from 2013, was it worth what you went through to be where you are today?
In 1991, when I was called to testify I was actually subpoenaed I set myself a goal to truthfully talk about the experience I had with Clarence Thomas because I thought, and I still think, that it reflected on his ability to be an impartial judge in any case involving the law, but certainly any case involving civil rights, inequality issues. Having done that, yes, it was worth it. I have no regrets.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-anita-hill-conversation-20130113,0,191725.story
CE5
(62 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)NICO9000
(970 posts)So disgraceful that Thurgood Marshall's position was filled by this idiot.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Ask to go to the bathroom?
Festivito
(13,452 posts)What a graceless buffoon.
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)question everything
(47,431 posts)and the one before the break had a flashback of an African American Justice administers the oath of office to the newly elected president. And I was thinking - can't be Thomas. No one even knows how he sounds. I did not know it was seven years. I though it was 20 years, since he was confirmed.
Eagle_Eye
(1,439 posts)He finished a sentence he started seven years ago, only nobody could remember the subject.
undeterred
(34,658 posts)It was the most intelligent thing he's done in years.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)ThoughtCriminal
(14,046 posts)Engineer: So Sven,... you went to Yale?
Project Manager: I yust got out!
LuckyLib
(6,817 posts)and questions, refuses to speak or engage any participating attorneys or his colleagues. WTF? You mean we have to pass a law to be sure that if you are a sitting justice and you refuse to speak we can oust you? It's an insult to his peers, the legal professional, and the entire nation. Not that he would have anything much to say of import anyway, but it might give us some indication of brain functioning -- or not.