Justice Clarence Thomas for Prez in 2012?

[danefan]

Justice Clarence Thomas seems bored. Why doesn't he run for president in 2012?
By Kashmir Hill and David Lat
Sunday, June 13, 2010

The end of the Supreme Court term later this month marks a milestone: four years in which Justice Clarence Thomas hasn't spoken during oral arguments. That's more than 250 cases heard, and not one word from Thomas, the longest silence of his nearly 19 years on the bench.

Is he unhappy? Bored? Restless?

This is not his normal state. When the justice from Georgia steps out of his black robes, he's a gregarious fellow. When addressing law students, bar associations or Congress, he is charismatic and compelling. At a speech at the University of Florida this year, he cracked self-deprecating jokes and made football references. "Many of you are passionate about your Florida Gators, but how passionate are we about the principles that underlie our country?" he asked. Unfortunately, his people skills are wasted in the stuffy, stilted, stylized interactions between lawyers and Supreme Court justices.

Soon after the election of President George H.W. Bush, when he was approached about serving as a federal judge, Thomas -- then the director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission -- said he couldn't imagine spending the rest of his life on the bench. But his friend, federal appeals court Judge Laurence Silberman, responded: "It's not like slavery, Clarence. You can always leave if you don't like it." Twenty years later, Thomas is still honored to be a judge. "But I wouldn't say I like it," he said in a speech at Chapman University in 2007. "There's not much that entices about the job."

So why not step down? Thomas should leave his perch at 1 First Street -- and head for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

The Republican Party is in disarray, with no clear message -- as shown in last week's primaries -- and with no obvious candidate to challenge President Obama in 2012. Thomas could be the GOP's new standard-bearer. He has enviable name recognition, both as a long-serving justice and as the author of the bestselling 2007 autobiography "My Grandfather's Son." And he has already survived the nasty political attacks that marked his 1991 confirmation hearings.

...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03249.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting to say the least. He definitely hates his current job.

[UNHWildCats]

Justice Clarence Thomas seems bored. Why doesn't he run for president in 2012?
By Kashmir Hill and David Lat
Sunday, June 13, 2010

The end of the Supreme Court term later this month marks a milestone: four years in which Justice Clarence Thomas hasn't spoken during oral arguments. That's more than 250 cases heard, and not one word from Thomas, the longest silence of his nearly 19 years on the bench.

Is he unhappy? Bored? Restless?

This is not his normal state. When the justice from Georgia steps out of his black robes, he's a gregarious fellow. When addressing law students, bar associations or Congress, he is charismatic and compelling. At a speech at the University of Florida this year, he cracked self-deprecating jokes and made football references. "Many of you are passionate about your Florida Gators, but how passionate are we about the principles that underlie our country?" he asked. Unfortunately, his people skills are wasted in the stuffy, stilted, stylized interactions between lawyers and Supreme Court justices.

Soon after the election of President George H.W. Bush, when he was approached about serving as a federal judge, Thomas -- then the director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission -- said he couldn't imagine spending the rest of his life on the bench. But his friend, federal appeals court Judge Laurence Silberman, responded: "It's not like slavery, Clarence. You can always leave if you don't like it." Twenty years later, Thomas is still honored to be a judge. "But I wouldn't say I like it," he said in a speech at Chapman University in 2007. "There's not much that entices about the job."

So why not step down? Thomas should leave his perch at 1 First Street -- and head for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

The Republican Party is in disarray, with no clear message -- as shown in last week's primaries -- and with no obvious candidate to challenge President Obama in 2012. Thomas could be the GOP's new standard-bearer. He has enviable name recognition, both as a long-serving justice and as the author of the bestselling 2007 autobiography "My Grandfather's Son." And he has already survived the nasty political attacks that marked his 1991 confirmation hearings.

...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03249.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting to say the least. He definitely hates his current job.

Not sure how GOP voters would like him waliing away and giving Obama yet another court nomination.

[Franks Tanks]

Justice Clarence Thomas seems bored. Why doesn't he run for president in 2012?
By Kashmir Hill and David Lat
Sunday, June 13, 2010

The end of the Supreme Court term later this month marks a milestone: four years in which Justice Clarence Thomas hasn't spoken during oral arguments. That's more than 250 cases heard, and not one word from Thomas, the longest silence of his nearly 19 years on the bench.

Is he unhappy? Bored? Restless?

This is not his normal state. When the justice from Georgia steps out of his black robes, he's a gregarious fellow. When addressing law students, bar associations or Congress, he is charismatic and compelling. At a speech at the University of Florida this year, he cracked self-deprecating jokes and made football references. "Many of you are passionate about your Florida Gators, but how passionate are we about the principles that underlie our country?" he asked. Unfortunately, his people skills are wasted in the stuffy, stilted, stylized interactions between lawyers and Supreme Court justices.

Soon after the election of President George H.W. Bush, when he was approached about serving as a federal judge, Thomas -- then the director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission -- said he couldn't imagine spending the rest of his life on the bench. But his friend, federal appeals court Judge Laurence Silberman, responded: "It's not like slavery, Clarence. You can always leave if you don't like it." Twenty years later, Thomas is still honored to be a judge. "But I wouldn't say I like it," he said in a speech at Chapman University in 2007. "There's not much that entices about the job."

So why not step down? Thomas should leave his perch at 1 First Street -- and head for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

The Republican Party is in disarray, with no clear message -- as shown in last week's primaries -- and with no obvious candidate to challenge President Obama in 2012. Thomas could be the GOP's new standard-bearer. He has enviable name recognition, both as a long-serving justice and as the author of the bestselling 2007 autobiography "My Grandfather's Son." And he has already survived the nasty political attacks that marked his 1991 confirmation hearings.

...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03249.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting to say the least. He definitely hates his current job.

Interesting idea for the struggling GOP. He would surely get killed for his lack of experience at actually being in charge of people and budgets, but it may take a bold move from the GOP such as this to challange Obama in 2012 (despite his current dip in popularity).

It would also be nice to see a Patriot Leaguer in the White House (Holy Cross grad).

[Baldy]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03249.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting to say the least. He definitely hates his current job.

Not sure how GOP voters would like him waliing away and giving Obama yet another court nomination.

Not sure what the laws are, but why couldn't he do both? If Kerry, Obama, McCain, The Hildabeast, etc. can run for President while keeping their Senate seats, why couldn't Thomas stay on the bench and run?

[GannonFan]

Not sure how GOP voters would like him waliing away and giving Obama yet another court nomination.

Not sure what the laws are, but why couldn't he do both? If Kerry, Obama, McCain, The Hildabeast, etc. can run for President while keeping their Senate seats, why couldn't Thomas stay on the bench and run?

Agree - there's nothing Constitutionally that would prevent him from running while being a sitting judge.

Of course, that would also beg the question as to who would even vote for Thomas - it's not like his confirmation was a smooth ride and he's got a bit of a spotty record on the bench to boot. The GOP has to have a bevy of throwaway candidates that would be better suited than throwing this guy out there. Most parties don't run great candidates following a President's first term (McGovern in '72, Mondale in '84, Dole in '96, Kerry in '04) so Thomas would fit at least that bill.

[mainejeff]

You could run Morgan Freeman right now and he wouldn't win.

This country has "black fatigue".

[ASUG8]

It will be the Anita Hill controversy all over again.

[SuperHornet]

This would set a precedent (1st from SCOTUS to Executive Branch). I'm of the opinion that we'll see the gender glass ceiling broken (Sarah P. to the White House) before THIS precedent comes.

(Yes, we HAVE had a President go to SCOTUS.)

[GannonFan]

You could run Morgan Freeman right now and he wouldn't win.

This country has "black fatigue".

I don't know - maybe show some clips from the movie "Deep Impact" and you might be able to convince people that Morgan Freeman is already President - you always get a nice boost being the incumbent!

[blueballs]

It will be the Anita Hill controversy all over again.

Correct, the mainstream media would crucify him.

[UNHWildCats]

Perhaps constitutionally speaking he could run while still on the court... However I don't see how he can be out campaigning for office and debating issues that very well maybe in front of him on the court.

Aside from that, its easier to justify a Congressman or Senator missing a vote and they can easily fly in for votes if need be, but a Justice needs to be there a lot hearing arguments, writing opinions and what not.

Basically the court is in session during the important times of presidential campaigns... during the meaningful primaries and then the lead up to election day...

If a SCOTUS justice were to run, he/she would need to resign, maybe not legally, but he/she would.

[Ivytalk]

There is a federal code of judicial conduct that effectively precludes a sitting judge from holding elective office. THat said, I don't think Thomas would resign to enter the fray.

But ol' William Howard Taft was president first and SCOTUS later.

[SuperHornet]

Ivy: I think that priciple holds true at about every level. However, I don't believe that would be construed to mean that he would be prevented from running while on the Court. Should he lose (a likely outcome), he'd still be on the court, no harm, no foul. Should he win, all he'd have to do is submit his resignation from SCOTUS the day after the election is confirmed in the Electoral College, which usually happens sometime in the first two weeks of December.

[GSUAlumniEagle]

Simply no way in hell this happens.

I read Thomas' book last year. Knew he was from my hometown (Savannah), but beyond that it was a rather dull read. But one of the things I remember thinking about the book was how much Thomas portrayed that the Anita Hill saga drained him. No way he puts himself through that again, and we all know it WOULD come up.

Beyond that, as has been constantly stated here, no way a sitting SCOTUS justice would run for office while holding a seat on the Court. The conflict of interest is simply too great, and they'd miss practically an entire term. No way in hell it happens.

And since there's no way Thomas would resign his seat to run, in effect allowing Obama to replace him with a more liberal justice, this isn't worth discussing. Which makes me wonder why I wasted the five minutes typing this post. Boredom, I suppose.

[UNHWildCats]

Simply no way in hell this happens.

I read Thomas' book last year. Knew he was from my hometown (Savannah), but beyond that it was a rather dull read. But one of the things I remember thinking about the book was how much Thomas portrayed that the Anita Hill saga drained him. No way he puts himself through that again, and we all know it WOULD come up.

Beyond that, as has been constantly stated here, no way a sitting SCOTUS justice would run for office while holding a seat on the Court. The conflict of interest is simply too great, and they'd miss practically an entire term. No way in hell it happens.

And since there's no way Thomas would resign his seat to run, in effect allowing Obama to replace him with a more liberal justice, this isn't worth discussing. Which makes me wonder why I wasted the five minutes typing this post. Boredom, I suppose.

Its also worth pointing out that even if he were to maintain his seat and go AWOL from the court to run for office like lots of Senators do, he unlike a Senator faces the possibility of impeachment.

[AZGrizFan]

You could run Morgan Freeman right now and he wouldn't win.

This country has "black fatigue".

I don't know - maybe show some clips from the movie "Deep Impact" and you might be able to convince people that Morgan Freeman is already President - you always get a nice boost being the incumbent!

"black fatigue". That's a good one, mj.

...although I think it's more likely we've got "idiot-communist-hypocrite-politician fatigue."

[Baldy]

Simply no way in hell this happens.

I read Thomas' book last year. Knew he was from my hometown (Savannah), but beyond that it was a rather dull read. But one of the things I remember thinking about the book was how much Thomas portrayed that the Anita Hill saga drained him. No way he puts himself through that again, and we all know it WOULD come up.

Beyond that, as has been constantly stated here, no way a sitting SCOTUS justice would run for office while holding a seat on the Court. The conflict of interest is simply too great, and they'd miss practically an entire term. No way in hell it happens.

And since there's no way Thomas would resign his seat to run, in effect allowing Obama to replace him with a more liberal justice, this isn't worth discussing. Which makes me wonder why I wasted the five minutes typing this post. Boredom, I suppose.

Of course he isn't going to run, but the interesting proposition is certainly worthy of a conversation.

[native]

Clarence Thomas is one of my all-time favorite justices!

Unlike many, he is "real people" and has written many solid opinions, to the great surprise of both his arrogant liberal and hoity-toity conservative critics. Fvck 'em!

[danefan]

Clarence Thomas is one of my all-time favorite justices!

Unlike many, he is "real people" and has written many solid opinions, to the great surprise of both his arrogant liberal and hoity-toity conservative critics. Fvck 'em!

Can you cite to one decision he's ever written of consequence?

[HI54UNI]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03249.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting to say the least. He definitely hates his current job.

Interesting idea for the struggling GOP. He would surely get killed for his lack of experience at actually being in charge of people and budgets, but it may take a bold move from the GOP such as this to challange Obama in 2012 (despite his current dip in popularity).

It would also be nice to see a Patriot Leaguer in the White House (Holy Cross grad).

That didn't seem to matter to people voting for Barry.

[native]

Clarence Thomas is one of my all-time favorite justices!

Unlike many, he is "real people" and has written many solid opinions, to the great surprise of both his arrogant liberal and hoity-toity conservative critics. Fvck 'em!

Can you cite to one decision he's ever written of consequence?

As an "originalist," Thomas in his opinions stands with the Founders more than any other Justice and serves as the Court's strongest proponent of Federalist No. 78, which states that while "the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited constitution against legislative encroach ments," it is the limited Constitution itself that provides the best security against tyranny.
http://www.legalowl.com/topics/Clarence ... ddo7k3mrl6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mitchell v Helms and Good News v Milford would be a couple of Thomas' best and most impactful opinions. Both exhibit his leadership and originalist interpretation of the Constitution.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-1648.ZO.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... ol=98-1648" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_99_2036" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some knowledgable court observers do no agree with the stereotype of Thomas as an inferior understudy of Scalia. Unlike Scalia,Thomas is never arrogant, sarcastic, or "too clever by half."
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009590" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thomas' concurrence in US v Hubbell is an example of his thoughtful love of the Constitution, erstwhile support for the Fifth Amendment, and political independence.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-166.ZC.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

His dissent in Virginia v Black is also notable for his passion and his disagreement with Scalia. Even if you disagree with Thomas and support the majority in favor of cross-burning as free speech, aren't you glad that he articulated for posterity his particular point of view and rationale against cross-burning?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-1107.ZD.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BDKJMU]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03249.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting to say the least. He definitely hates his current job.

Interesting idea for the struggling GOP. He would surely get killed for his lack of experience at actually being in charge of people and budgets, but it may take a bold move from the GOP such as this to challange Obama in 2012 (despite his current dip in popularity).

It would also be nice to see a Patriot Leaguer in the White House (Holy Cross grad).

Heck, the GOP may be challenging Clinton in 2012...

[houndawg]

Simply no way in hell this happens.

I read Thomas' book last year. Knew he was from my hometown (Savannah), but beyond that it was a rather dull read. But one of the things I remember thinking about the book was how much Thomas portrayed that the Anita Hill saga drained him. No way he puts himself through that again, and we all know it WOULD come up.

Beyond that, as has been constantly stated here, no way a sitting SCOTUS justice would run for office while holding a seat on the Court. The conflict of interest is simply too great, and they'd miss practically an entire term. No way in hell it happens.

And since there's no way Thomas would resign his seat to run, in effect allowing Obama to replace him with a more liberal justice, this isn't worth discussing. Which makes me wonder why I wasted the five minutes typing this post. Boredom, I suppose.

Of course he isn't going to run, but the interesting proposition is certainly worthy of a conversation.

No way he runs unless the secret service can guarantee his sodas will remain pubic-hair free. And I don't see that happening.

[GannonFan]

Simply no way in hell this happens.

I read Thomas' book last year. Knew he was from my hometown (Savannah), but beyond that it was a rather dull read. But one of the things I remember thinking about the book was how much Thomas portrayed that the Anita Hill saga drained him. No way he puts himself through that again, and we all know it WOULD come up.

Beyond that, as has been constantly stated here, no way a sitting SCOTUS justice would run for office while holding a seat on the Court. The conflict of interest is simply too great, and they'd miss practically an entire term. No way in hell it happens.

And since there's no way Thomas would resign his seat to run, in effect allowing Obama to replace him with a more liberal justice, this isn't worth discussing. Which makes me wonder why I wasted the five minutes typing this post. Boredom, I suppose.

Its also worth pointing out that even if he were to maintain his seat and go AWOL from the court to run for office like lots of Senators do, he unlike a Senator faces the possibility of impeachment.

Of course, impeachment also requires 2/3 of the Senate to remove him from his position so I don't think that would be anywhere close to likely in this case if it were to happen.

[mainejeff]

Clarence Thomas is one of my all-time favorite justices!

Unlike many, he is "real people"..........

Yeah....."real people" like our Founding Fathers were trying to protect us from!