Clarence Thomas, Worst Supreme Court Justice

c-thomas

In the above video Anita Hill stated in her Senate testimony on 10/12/91  about Clarence Thomas; “he would turn the conversation to a discussion of sexual matters. His conversations were very vivid. He spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes.  He talked about pornographic materials depicting individuals with large penises or large breasts involving various sex acts. On several occasions, Thomas told me graphically of his own sexual prowess.  Because I was extremely uncomfortable talking about sex with him at all, and particularly in such a graphic way, I told him that I did not want to talk about this subject. I would also try to change the subject to education matters or to non-sexual personal matters, such as his background or his beliefs.”  Hill also claimed Thomas stated “there is a pubic hair in my Coke” and that he spoke of “Long Dong Silver”.

Republican Senator Orrin Hatch was one of Clarence Thomas’s biggest supporters and defenders as shown in the above video.

Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas –  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/21/AR2010102106645_2.html

In the above article, ex girlfriend Lillian McEwen stated “He was obsessed with porn.”   “He would talk about what he had seen in magazines and films, if there was something worth noting.”

McEwen also said that the conservative Thomas was constantly on the make at work.  “He was always actively watching the women he worked with to see if they could be potential partners,” said McEwen. “It was a hobby of his.”  She added that he once told her he had asked a woman at work what her bra size was.

If McEwen’s accusations are true, that would collaborate Anita Hill’s testimony and prove that Clarence Thomas lied to the Senate, committed perjury and should be removed as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

Here’s additional articles which substantiate that Clarence Thomas lied;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/schuster-institute-for-investigative-journalism/what-they-didnt-tell-you-_b_5070620.html

http://crooksandliars.com/paul-rosenberg/lying-confirmation-process-clarence

Lying Under Oath Could be used as grounds for Removal from Office

 

Supreme Court Justice Failed To Disclose His Wife’s $700,000 Income

WASHINGTON — Democratic lawmakers on Thursday called for a federal investigation into Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ failure to report hundreds of thousands of dollars on annual financial disclosure forms. Led by House Rules Committee ranking member Rep.

Democratic lawmakers have called for a federal investigation into Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ failure to report hundreds of thousands of dollars on annual financial disclosure forms.

 

.

Clarence Thomas vote caused worst president ever, George W. Bush to be installed as President.

Clarence Thomas’s vote caused a Key Provision Of Voting Rights Law to be struck down.

Clarence Thomas cast the key fifth vote enabling corporations to spend unlimited money influencing U.S. elections. As a result of this vote, outside groups spent nearly $300 million influencing the 2010 elections — much of which would have been illegal before Justice Thomas approved this spending.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/02/04/142472/thomas-corruption/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/14/clarence-thomas-speaks_n_2473316.html

Justice Clarence Thomas’ head-scratching, jaw-dropping dissents 

Just because Justice Clarence Thomas has a reputation for staying silent on the bench, doesn’t mean the polarizing conservative didn’t apply his own brand of knotty logic in his written dissent of the court’s rulings.

Here are two head-scratching, jaw-dropping examples of Thomas’ recent logical gymnastics at work.

Discrimination exists, we just have to live with it

In the case dealing with the Fair Housing Act, the Supreme Court ruled that the law constitutionally protects against actions that lead to discriminatory results — known as disparate impact — in addition to implicit discrimination. Here’s a nugget from Thomas’ dissent.

“Racial imbalances do not always disfavor minorities … [I]n our own country, for roughly a quarter-century now, over 70 percent of National Basketball Association players have been black. To presume that these and all other measurable disparities are products of racial discrimination is to ignore the complexities of human existence.”

Thomas appears to be saying that, sure, there’s plenty of discrimination floating around but it’d be unfair to chalk it all up to racism. Just look at the NBA. They’re fine, even though most players are black.

In making that point, Thomas fails to acknowledge the actual application of disparate impact claims. Just because the NBA employs a majority of black players doesn’t mean that there is discrimination at work — or that a white player would file a suit to claim as much. Even if that were to happen, the courts would then still have to determine whether the claims of disparate impact discrimination were valid and violated the law. So merely claiming that, in some industries, for instance, minorities have a majority stake apparently does nothing to address the actual application of the law.

But there is one aspect of Thomas’ argument that is indisputable: A majority of NBA players are black.

Your dignity is not the government’s problem

In a win for marriage equality advocates around the country, the court ruled that all states must license and recognize same-sex marriage — regardless of state laws or where the marriages were performed. Justice Anthony Kennedy notably used the word “dignity” nine times in his 34-page opinion. Thomas had a different take on the issue of dignity.

“The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity) because the government allowed them to be enslaved. Those held in internment camps did not lose their dignity because the government confined them. And those denied governmental benefits certainly do not lose their dignity because the government denies them those benefits. The government cannot bestow dignity, and it cannot take it away.”

Despite being beaten, raped, and treated as subhuman property — all while living under a government that ostensibly permitted such treatment — slaves either did not lose their dignity at all or, in a broader reading, they can’t blame the government for any loss of dignity. Basically, not the government’s fault, Thomas appears to be saying.

By that application, Thomas’ point seems to be that same-sex couples should just buck up and recognize that it’s the not the government’s role to “bestow dignity.” Article source: msnbc.com/msnbc/justice-clarence-thomas-head-scratching-jaw-dropping-dissents

The US Supreme Court has proven that it is not just. Proof is how they almost always vote down part lines.  This underscores how flawed our justice system is in general.

The US Supreme Court has become nothing more than a political tool to force political policy of the prevailing majority of justices beliefs upon the American people.

No one should be appointed to a position for life.  These people should be given term limits.