Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas did the seemingly impossible. He turned from court mute to a hit man on President Obama. In an interview at Duquesne University Law School in April, Thomas snidely rapped Obama for being the darling of the "elites." To Thomas that means liberals, progressives, intellectuals, and the supposedly hopelessly liberal media. Thomas punctuated his slam of Obama by plopping the race card in the indictment, saying that these "elites" embraced him because he was their kind of black man, presumably in distinction to Thomas. This was a play on the tired conservative charge that liberal whites are supposedly so guilt ridden on race that they'll latch onto a black to salve their conscience.
This stunning turnabout for a jurist who brags and takes pride that he doesn't say a word on the bench, and not much else in public is not really a surprise. Race has always lurked just below the surface in Thomas's calculus. When the birther issue took flight for a hot minute a few years ago, Thomas was anything but silent. He took the almost unheard of step of reopening the issue by agreeing to put the matter to a conference vote of the judges. Thomas's ridiculous lone wolf effort to arm-twist the justices to examine the birth certificate issue made no sense to most legal experts.
But it fit perfectly in with his jaundiced interpretation of law and its practice and his private vow to get revenge on his liberal and especially black tormentors. Obama was the perfect target. When Obama was asked at a joint church gathering with Republican rival John McCain during the 2008 campaign which justice he wouldn't have nominated to the Supreme Court. He didn't hesitate. He named Thomas. And he told why.
"I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or
legal thinker at the time, for that elevation, setting aside the fact that I
profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the
Even if Obama hadn't ripped Thomas publicly he still would have been in his sights. This is where his "elites" synonym comes into play to knock Obama. He is the polar opposite of Thomas. He's a moderate Democrat, a former civil rights attorney, and community organizer. He backs expanded government, affirmative action, abortion rights, a severely restricted use of the death penalty, and to the absolute horror of Thomas and hard line conservatives, he backs a broader interpretation of legal precepts.
Obama almost certainly would have joined the swollen
chorus of civil rights and civil liberties groups that pounded Thomas during
his High Court confirmation fight in 1991 for his anti-affirmative action,
anti-abortion, and anti-prisoner rights views. The Senate confirmed him by the
narrowest vote of any high court judge in recent confirmation history. The
rebuke stung deeply, and Thomas didn't forget or forgive. In an American
Enterprise Institute lecture in 2001, he wrapped himself in the martyr's
garment and said that he expected to be treated badly for challenging liberal
When asked how long he'd stay on the court, he reportedly said that he'd stay there for next 43 years of his life. He was 43 at the time. In a more revealing aside, he supposedly quipped to friends that it would take him that long to get even. Whether this was hyperbole or an apocryphal tale, it hasn't taken him 43 years to wreak his revenge.
Thomas has been a one man wrecking crew to expunge race from law and public policy decisions. But this is not simply one man's personal bitterness over his alleged mistreatment by liberals and civil rights leaders. Nor is it a case of Thomas digging his heels in to push his retrograde view on legal matters. He wants more judges to think and act like him on the bench. Obama has made it clear not only that he would not appoint another Thomas to the High Court but that the type of judges he'd appoint will be the diametric opposite of him. There's a good chance that he will have that chance, maybe two possibly three chances.
The court's liberals, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, John Paul Stevens, and Stephen Breyer, and the moderate to conservative Anthony Kennedy are in their seventies. Obama will likely pick likeminded judicially philosophical judges to replace one or more of them. This will decisively thwart Thomas and the conservative's on the court's counter revolution. A win by failed GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney would have insured that there have been even more justices who would likely see eye to eye with Thomas on abortion, affirmative action, the death penalty, prisoner rights, and Bush's war on terrorism orders.
Thomas's sudden discovery of his voice on Obama and the tie in to race was a salvo and a warning that Thomas will play dirty whenever he can on race to thwart and hector Obama. His hit on Obama wasn't the first and it won't be the last.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new ebook is How the NRA Terrorizes Congress--The NRA's Subversion of the Gun Control Debate ( Amazon ). He is an associate editor of New America Media. He is a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on American Urban Radio Network. He is the host of the weekly Hutchinson Report on KTYM 1460 AM Radio Los Angeles and KPFK-Radio and the Pacifica Network.
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson