Sunday, March 13, 2022

Clarence Thomas is as bad as it gets. Having had a play in Gore v. Bush, he talks of politicization of the Supremes. Curiously, he seems to have little to say against spousal influence peddling. Perhaps, an outlook may be voiced there, another day.

 Anita Hill came across as trustworthy and believable. I have always felt she was telling the truth. That was yesterday.

Today - John Danforth's backed nominee, vetted by a committee chaired by Joe Biden, must be the longest tenured seat holder on the Court.

Today - Thomas continues to sit the seat previously held by Thurgood Marshall. Marshall was the first black person to be on the Court, and was universally respected as of a fair opinion. Marshall had a distinguished legal career before being nominated by President Johnson, having been an NAACP appellate litigator. He argued and won Brown v Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. Thomas was a Republican-appointed EEOC head before Danforth moved to advance his career, and while at EEOC Thomas was accused by Anita Hill, (and three other witnesses Joe Biden did not schedule to testify in the Thomas hearing), of sexual harassment while Hill was employed at the Thomas-led EEOC, the federal organization intended to police employment misconduct. 

Today - Strib's carry of an AP feed is titled, "Justice Thomas slams cancel culture, 'packing' Supreme Court". Opening paragraph:

SALT LAKE CITY — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said he's concerned efforts to politicize the court or add additional justices may erode the institution's credibility, speaking Friday in Utah at an event hosted by former Republican U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch's foundation.

Really. "The institution's credibilty." Thomas. Him. Saying that. 

Strib continued -

"You can cavalierly talk about packing or stacking the court. You can cavalierly talk about doing this or doing that. At some point the institution is going to be compromised," he told an audience of about 500 people at an upscale hotel in Salt Lake City.

"By doing this, you continue to chip away at the respect of the institutions that the next generation is going to need if they're going to have civil society," Thomas said.

Anita Hill had earned respect. Respect does not attach to where you sit, it attaches to who you are and have been. When people accord respect, it is a subjective thing. It is not because you sit in a high chair with a robe on.

After those three opening paragraphs - I read no further. The link has been provided in opening this post. Read as much of the linked item as you care to read.

Perhaps this post merits an update. About the spousal thing. Or something else. However, all for now.