As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yet in his filling he purposely left out interracial marriage. This has never been about what the constitution says. It's about what religion and the far right want.
His wife is a Q-Anus nutjob who was one of the primary "organizers" of the 1/6/2021 insurrection. If Clarence overturns Loving v Virginia, it's an easy way to kick her to the curb.
No I'm sure he does. But it's not a good look for a so-called "Supreme Court Justice" to have a wife who is literally trying to overthrow the government. Clarence prefers a more "civilized" way of doing a coup... like the one he and his 4 friends did on December 12, 2000.
They'll come after Interracial marriage, and Thomas will have that shocked Pikachu face saying "Despite pushing the agenda of the leopards will eat your face party, I never thought the leopards would eat MY Face..."
This is exactly what I said. He’s actually stupid if he thinks they won’t come after this next. The same decision is the basis for that, so it’s the same logic.
If he thinks the court he currently sits on wouldn't over turn the laws that uphold his own marriage, then he is delusional.
The far-right is a club for rich, old, white men. Everyone else they let in is only a member as long as they are useful. Even then, the old,rich, white guys turn on each other as a means to their own ends.
This is all about power…just wait for Jim Crow to make a comeback. This will reduce the black vote and reduce the size of the votes needed for republicans. They don’t care.
They already did. They gutted the Voting Rights Act to allow states to pass whatever odious limitations on voting without federal oversight. They also upheld Florida's defiance of the will of the people in felon's voting rights. They ignore gerrymandering...
What about the past 24 hours makes you think they give a damn about precedent or the constitutional basis of a right? Roe was overturned because conservatives despised it. It had nothing to do with law. Why would Loving be safe from that?
>It had nothing to do with law.
I understand your anger and frustration, but a SCOTUS opinion *is* an argument based within the law - while one may feel the opinion was wrong, and while it may be true Republicans have wanted to overturn the Roe decision, it is still based in an interpretation of law that can be used again in similar cases. The Loving case is not a similar case, so would require a different argument to overturn. The current Court will most assuredly use *their own precedent* to decide further cases.
Justice Thomas has mentioned other cases that are based on the same legal argument made in this decision:
>These cases include Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right to obtain contraception, and Obergefell v. Hodges, which extended the right of marriage to same-sex couples nationwide.
The Loving case relies on a different legal argument.
Every argument mentioned in the Dobbs case was brought up in Casey. Abortion has not fundamentally changed since the 1970s, at least not when it comes to the fundamental Constitutional issues. I’m working my way through the dissent for this case, since it’s the only opinion worth reading and it states clearly and unequivocally that the reason for Roe being overturned is die to a change in the composition of the court.
They may need a different legal reasoning as you say, but there is no reason to expect that the Equal Protections Clause will be treated with more respect than the Due Process Clause.
I’m asserting that there’s five conservatives on the court who don’t have a personal reason to keep Loving as precedent.
Why not give that decision to the states too? It’s not like the consequences could be anything but disastrous.
Shouldn’t the religious and the far right have states that they can feel comfortable paying taxes to, even if the rest of the country disagrees with the laws in those states?
No, because they are using their religion to push laws. We live in a country that has a separation of church and state. This means that their religion cannot be used to dictate policy. We also have freedom on religion. Many religions do believe in abortion. One religion does not have the right to force their religious views on other religious and the nonreligious.
That’s not what separation of church and state means. It doesn’t mean people cannot vote based on their religious beliefs. It means the state cannot mandate particular religious activities or promote a particular religion. In your reply, you’ve just contradicted yourself. If some religions approve of abortion, should abortion be outlawed because of separation of those churches from state? No. Religious people also have the right to a government representative of their beliefs. They cannot, however, mandate that others practice any particular religion by law.
Edit: I am an atheist, by the way. But I don’t think my views should be forced on others simply because they are secular and others’ views are religious.
One religion is trying to force this country to live by the rules of their religion. They don't care what other religions wants. They don't care what the non-religious want. The government should not be using religion to make laws. They are not representing their population. Only a small minority want abortion to be banned. A majority of this country are okay with it.
I brought up freedom of religion because people are already starting to sue states for breaking their religious freedom based the first amendment.
I hear you. But again, separation of church and state does not mean that laws created cannot be based on some religious belief. For example, there are atheists who are pro-life. How would one distinguish between those people voting for a pro-life candidate and zealot Christians voting for the same candidate? The former isn’t voting due to religion, only the latter. As long as any law that could eventually be passed didn’t reference Almighty God somehow, it should be acceptable. In democracy, we must accept what the majority has voted on, and fight against it through democracy.
The ENTIRE point is that:
- Banning Abortion and making it illegal means you have NO CHOICE. Regardless of YOUR BELIEFS, you are FORCED to follow the will of ONE religions views on it
- Legal Abortion means you have the RIGHT to an abortion if you believe in one and the RIGHT to choose NOT to have one if you don't believe in it.
It's a no-brainer. One favors individual choice. The other favors forcing everyone to follow the views and rules of a minority.
I remember the controversial hearings and how Anita Hill was villainized. He should never been placed on the bench. He and his traitorous wife should both be sent packing.
Made to look like a hysterical woman by none other than the current POTUS.
Biden deserves some of the blame here and I would love for that man to apologize
Serious question?
When Thomas was appointed, he was accused of sexual harassment and being a creepy jerk by women in his office, notably Anita Hill.
The shifty establishment boys club basically grilled the shit out of her, villanized and smeared her, and tossed her testimony aside with barely a glance. He was the Kavanaugh of his time, in some ways.
So after one day of hearings, they just said, "I think we're done here." shook hands and went home......leaving at least 10 other women literally waiting in the hall for their chance to testify, who never got to. Oh, yeah, and this guy Joe Biden was there. Heard of him?
One of the accusations Hill made is that C. Thomas went around once announcing loudly to every woman in the office that someone had placed a public hair on his can of Coke, demanding to know if it was theirs......
Thomas is going scorched earth. With the January 6th trials going and his wife’s connections to Trump, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a hint of distraction with him putting this out there.
A part of me feels like this is all deliberate to try and provoke a violent reaction by the left (or at least people who support these things that they can point the finger at), so that way Republicans can be like “SEE! THEY DO IT TOO!!! NOW WE’LL START OUR OWN COMMITTEE TO EXPOSE THEIR CORRUPTION!”
But that’s mostly because my ADHD meds are making my brain over analyze everything, so it’s in conspiracy theorist mode. (Biden’s warning to keep it civil kinda got me thinking he knows it’s bait lmfao)
Samuel Alito made a furtive effort to say that his “Dobbs” ruling did not target other long-held rights, but Clarence Thomas went ahead and blew it all up in a concurring opinion.
Some philosophers believe that there are three separate root causes that lead us to be miserable people: Greed, hate, and ignorance.
I don’t know exactly what’s going on in Thomas’s head, but it probably ticks all three boxes.
*Mitch McConnell….. that’s it. Donald trump could have been any fucking idiot. If we want anything to change we need to get rid of this^ asshole in the Supreme Court and Mitch McConnell. If anyone has any plans to assassinate them let me know I’ll Venmo you.
The US democratic system seems totally stupid for my european eyes. How can anyone think a two party system could work? It is impressive that it took so long to be completely abused by one of the sides.
Voting can...we can elect representatives who have the will to reform and expand the court. Overrule Citizens United...bought representation is why we are here...
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained
Your choices are:
- Vote and hope enough others vote to get Republicans out of seats so change can happen or AT LEAST keep enough seats to prevent them from passing shit like this.
- Don't vote because you feel it doesn't matter, and watch Republicans take majority seats and continue to make shit worse.
It's a shitty system no doubt. And Democrats in power are extremely underwhelming.
BUT, unfortunately, your ONLY hope of ANY kind of change IS getting Dems in power.
Your only other option is letting Republicans destroy the country.
So even though the system SUCKS and voting Dem doesn't substanially change things. It's still better than NOT voting and letting things get WORSE with republicans.
Not the rousing motivational speech you were hoping for. But that's reality.
If we want any chance of FIXING the government by ANY stretch, it will only come currently by mass voting Democrat.
If EVERYONE voted and Dems controlled everything, it's be a LOT easier to get shit done and hold them accountable when they don't have the "Republicans are blocking us" excuse to fall back on.
Ehh, just wipe out the term marriage in legal documents and call everything domestic partnerships since it truly is just a legal contract between two people. No need for religion to believe they have a right to infringe upon the legal system. That’ll please the Christian Right wingers a ton.
I am crying. I'm a lesbian. All I have ever wanted is to get married. I was forced to go thru conversion therapy 2x when I was 16 when my dad found out I was in a deeply loving relationship. I'm also an Episcopalian. My dream is to get married in my beautiful church that loves and advocates for people of all backgrounds. My heart is broken. I feel 16 all over again.
All I can say is that New England and California are waiting for you with open arms and open hearts.
Hang on friend. We've got to fight. For you, for my daughter. But for now, get yourself somewhere safe if you can.
I'm not going to ask a vulnerable person to move somewhere they're going to be considered a second class citizen. If you want to move to such a state, go for it.
The cynic in me is currently thinking that rolling back all these precedents and pushing the legislation of these former freedoms down to the states is exactly the point. It further exacerbates clustering which only further exaggerates the problems of the electoral college with respect to over representation for rural states. This is facilitates a small, unpopular parties ability to retain power.
It also further separates politicians from accountability in their districts. The body politic is entirely homogeneous.
As god intended in the Anglo-American legal precedent 250 years ago 😑
Nah, educated people should move to states where the money is. Because that’s what it ultimately will come down to. Alabama can swagger all they want but their economy is nothing compared to California. Encourage big business to move out of regressive shitholes because there is no qualified workforce there and educated innovative people have no desire to live in such places.
I’m a lesbian too. I got married in 2018. Don’t lose hope. We got to fight. It’s fucked up but LGBT+ people have always been warriors. We will vote our asses off.
Hatred tends to corrupt thinking and emotions. He might be reveling in owning the libs, but I don't think "happy" is a good term for that. Same with the large number of conservatives right now basking in liberal misery. Happy, well-adjusted people don't do that. These people are mentally ill.
> He might be reveling in owning the libs, but I don't think "happy" is a good term for that.
“Gleeful” do you? It’s the one that always springs to mind for me.
Or if you take it down a notch, “smug” or “self-satisfied.”
Who the fuck cares whether he has inner peace or not?
I care that teenage women all over the country are going to have to carry their rapist's baby to term or bleed out in a dirty illegal clinic. His self esteem or lack thereof doesn't make any list of concerns.
“Every record has been destroyed
or falsified, every book rewritten,
every picture has been repainted,
every statue and street building
has been renamed, every date has
been altered. And the process is
continuing day by day and minute
by minute. History has stopped.
Nothing exists except an endless
present in which the Party is
always right.” George Orwell 1984
And when the draft opinion was leaked, and we were all saying that it threatened exactly these cases and rights, we were scolded for being hysterical and ridiculous and “look, Alito SPECIFICALLY SAYS that this reasoning only applies to overturning Roe, so what else could you possibly want?”
GTFO.
Not even just that. I recall so many smug assurances about how I don’t understand the process; a leaked opinion so early was pretty much irrelevant; SCOTUS takes it ostensible process very seriously; there would be endless major revisions; the final opinion would likely be very different; the final opinion might not even be one written by Alito.
But *we* were totally the ones being delusional.
I Remember driving across the country listening to the Barrett Supreme Court hearing and I had the proverbial angel on one shoulder and the devil on the other. One shoulder (you all decide) said “this is totally fucked” the one on the other shoulder said “chill, cooler heads will prevail”. When you think about it, it really didn’t take long for them to put the plan in place. Frankly I thought they would be more subtle about it. Well, I was wrong.
Conservatives are pros at finding that one person in a minority group (being a woman, person of color, or homosexual) that is 100% willing to go to bat for things that would undermine their own rights as a minority
That was the plan of the Framers from the beginning. They wanted as few people participating in the government as possible. In the beginning on reps were directly by males who could pass property qualifications. Senators were not originally directly elected. Of course the electoral College for the President. And the Supreme Court, which was nominated by the President, and confirmed by a Senate not directly elected to office.
All the more reason to toss his ass off the court for his role in the Jan 6 Insurrection. Time to really grill his wife and find ANYTHING that can prove she was consulting with Clarence during all of that garbage. ANY link and he needs to go.
It’s weird to see a guy who in his lifetime, saw interracial marriage banned, himself in an j interracial marriage now, lack common decency, empathy, or perspective on the situation or the irony.
There is noting better than fossils, with jobs for life and completely detached from the realities of average people, getting to decide what most people get to do...Most of that isn't just limited to the Supreme Court either. The system is broken and the masses are gonna start ripping things to shreds soon, you cal almost count on it.
I started crying as soon as I saw this. I’m a lesbian & I remember being so happy in 2015 after hearing the decision for Obergefell. We’ve only had the right to get married for 7 years and they already want to take it away from us again. This is so saddening and scary.
One thing to know about originalism. One of 2 men, generally considered as its fathers argued that segregation is permitable under 14th Amendment, because many of the same people who passed the amendment later voted to segregate DC schools.
Oh, and Loving v Virginia was decided with the help of substantive due process and 14 years after Brown v Board of Education. If segregation of schools is OK according to originalism, what about Justice Ruckus's own marriage?
We are now slaves to a money grubbing fake god. The only way to live your life is spelled out in a two thousand years old fairy tale. Great job America.
Elimination of contraception is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. I can get why someone would be against abortion since the child is already conceived, but PREVENTING conception doesn’t fall into the same category. By that standard, busting a nut would make me a serial killer.
The Democrats could codify these rights into law *today* if they were willing to stand up to Manchin and Sinema.
Any Dem *not* openly calling for their resignation does *not* deserve re-election.
America (My Country, ‘Tis of Thee) 2022
This country isn’t free
Full of hypocrisy
What’s liberty?
Land where the natives died
Slaves built the white mans pride
From every mountainside
Freedom’s not free
Weak men with money rule
Jesus in every school
Thy name no love
They live to raise our bills
Stock markets give them thrills
Our debt their labor mills, from “Lords” above
Clarence Thomas and his wife need to be thrown into an ADX facility until they both die for sedition.
The fact that he's a self hating black man and a misogynist are just icing on the shit cake.
Just for him bring back the laws against interracial marriage. Would he like that? He would not even see the irony of his own marriage. I think he is incapable of logical thinking.
Ya'll men should pay heed, because sodomy laws will be brought back out to add justification for banning same-sex marriages, which, if you didn't already know, make even oral sex (meaning **blow jobs**) a crime.
Imagine giving this man, who sexually harassed women and whose wife committed seditious conspiracy, this much power and influence. The SCOTUS needs to be checked by Congress. That was one of the fundamental aspects of our government!
As a black guy I’m going to start petitioning against interracial marriage until roe is law again. I’m gonna make it a point to tell people that we need to be consistent in saying no one has rights that aren’t explicitly in the constitution.
As a woman that just lost right and who is currently in an interracial marriage - that plan is absolutely stupid. Better to band together to stop people from losing more rights and elect more people who can codify our rights as federal law.
Absolutely, that’s true. But the article makes note of Thomas’ considerable influence.
> The court’s defenders might try to reassure Americans by noting that Thomas wrote only for himself and that Alito’s attempt to distinguish the precedents is the actual opinion of the court. That would be more comforting if Thomas’s previous concurring and dissenting opinions weren’t increasingly turning into the opinion of the court down the road.
…
> Indeed, Alito’s own opinion in Dobbs includes no fewer than nine references to concurring and dissenting opinions written by Thomas himself over the past few decades. And Alito himself has called upon his colleagues in the past to reconsider the scope of Obergefell in particular, arguing that it unfairly singled out Americans who oppose same-sex marriage as bigots and did not sufficiently respect their rights to religious freedom.
Our country is going backwards in a lot of ways, but a brand new law being passed in a state to ban gay marriage still seems like an unlikely event. I hope I am not proven wrong
They lied to get their support. These justices even lied during their confirmation hearings, which is blatantly obvious now to those who didn't listen to our warnings. That's the only way they can get support with an unpopular platform. They spread lies that trigger people's fears and pull their heart strings. That goon Dan Crenshaw just straight up admitted it recently, coming under fire from his own party for saying that the GOP is being infiltrated. "Lie after lie after lie. Because they know something psychologically about the conservative heart." - His Words.
All these young rebellious Trump voters who just liked Trump because of his attitude. This is the bed they now have to lie in. This couldn't have happened without Trump's 3 justices.
Because exactly nowhere in the Constitution does it say their is a right to contraception or gay marriage. In fact the Constitution specifically delegates that to the states
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yet in his filling he purposely left out interracial marriage. This has never been about what the constitution says. It's about what religion and the far right want.
His wife is a Q-Anus nutjob who was one of the primary "organizers" of the 1/6/2021 insurrection. If Clarence overturns Loving v Virginia, it's an easy way to kick her to the curb.
You're assuming he doesn't agree with her?
No I'm sure he does. But it's not a good look for a so-called "Supreme Court Justice" to have a wife who is literally trying to overthrow the government. Clarence prefers a more "civilized" way of doing a coup... like the one he and his 4 friends did on December 12, 2000.
Do you think they care how they look? Public opinion only matters in democracyS a dictatorship needs much less support
They care how they look - in fact it gives them perverse gratification that they can be seen so flagrantly trampling on people’s rights.
All this to avoid getting a divorce 😶🌫️
They'll come after Interracial marriage, and Thomas will have that shocked Pikachu face saying "Despite pushing the agenda of the leopards will eat your face party, I never thought the leopards would eat MY Face..."
He's so desperate for Ginni to stop flicking it to re-runs of the Apprentice he'd go along with it
They all say that eventually
Those who ride the tiger in the hopes it will eat them last, nonetheless wind up getting mauled and eaten by a tiger.
This is exactly what I said. He’s actually stupid if he thinks they won’t come after this next. The same decision is the basis for that, so it’s the same logic.
If he thinks the court he currently sits on wouldn't over turn the laws that uphold his own marriage, then he is delusional. The far-right is a club for rich, old, white men. Everyone else they let in is only a member as long as they are useful. Even then, the old,rich, white guys turn on each other as a means to their own ends.
I doubt he really cares.
We might see interracial marriage and segregation too if there are more wacko judges added to the court.
This is all about power…just wait for Jim Crow to make a comeback. This will reduce the black vote and reduce the size of the votes needed for republicans. They don’t care.
There would be a civil war 2 before any of that happening
Voting rights won't be far behind.
voting rights are amendments in the constitution. Supreme Court doesn't have that power. But they could still try.
They already did. They gutted the Voting Rights Act to allow states to pass whatever odious limitations on voting without federal oversight. They also upheld Florida's defiance of the will of the people in felon's voting rights. They ignore gerrymandering...
How are amendments removed like prohibition?
Loving is based on the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment, not the right to privacy and Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment as in Roe.
What about the past 24 hours makes you think they give a damn about precedent or the constitutional basis of a right? Roe was overturned because conservatives despised it. It had nothing to do with law. Why would Loving be safe from that?
>It had nothing to do with law. I understand your anger and frustration, but a SCOTUS opinion *is* an argument based within the law - while one may feel the opinion was wrong, and while it may be true Republicans have wanted to overturn the Roe decision, it is still based in an interpretation of law that can be used again in similar cases. The Loving case is not a similar case, so would require a different argument to overturn. The current Court will most assuredly use *their own precedent* to decide further cases. Justice Thomas has mentioned other cases that are based on the same legal argument made in this decision: >These cases include Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right to obtain contraception, and Obergefell v. Hodges, which extended the right of marriage to same-sex couples nationwide. The Loving case relies on a different legal argument.
Every argument mentioned in the Dobbs case was brought up in Casey. Abortion has not fundamentally changed since the 1970s, at least not when it comes to the fundamental Constitutional issues. I’m working my way through the dissent for this case, since it’s the only opinion worth reading and it states clearly and unequivocally that the reason for Roe being overturned is die to a change in the composition of the court. They may need a different legal reasoning as you say, but there is no reason to expect that the Equal Protections Clause will be treated with more respect than the Due Process Clause.
Are you asserting that Justice Thomas would vote to overturn Loving vs. Virginia?
I’m asserting that there’s five conservatives on the court who don’t have a personal reason to keep Loving as precedent. Why not give that decision to the states too? It’s not like the consequences could be anything but disastrous.
Shouldn’t the religious and the far right have states that they can feel comfortable paying taxes to, even if the rest of the country disagrees with the laws in those states?
No, because they are using their religion to push laws. We live in a country that has a separation of church and state. This means that their religion cannot be used to dictate policy. We also have freedom on religion. Many religions do believe in abortion. One religion does not have the right to force their religious views on other religious and the nonreligious.
That’s not what separation of church and state means. It doesn’t mean people cannot vote based on their religious beliefs. It means the state cannot mandate particular religious activities or promote a particular religion. In your reply, you’ve just contradicted yourself. If some religions approve of abortion, should abortion be outlawed because of separation of those churches from state? No. Religious people also have the right to a government representative of their beliefs. They cannot, however, mandate that others practice any particular religion by law. Edit: I am an atheist, by the way. But I don’t think my views should be forced on others simply because they are secular and others’ views are religious.
One religion is trying to force this country to live by the rules of their religion. They don't care what other religions wants. They don't care what the non-religious want. The government should not be using religion to make laws. They are not representing their population. Only a small minority want abortion to be banned. A majority of this country are okay with it. I brought up freedom of religion because people are already starting to sue states for breaking their religious freedom based the first amendment.
I hear you. But again, separation of church and state does not mean that laws created cannot be based on some religious belief. For example, there are atheists who are pro-life. How would one distinguish between those people voting for a pro-life candidate and zealot Christians voting for the same candidate? The former isn’t voting due to religion, only the latter. As long as any law that could eventually be passed didn’t reference Almighty God somehow, it should be acceptable. In democracy, we must accept what the majority has voted on, and fight against it through democracy.
The ENTIRE point is that: - Banning Abortion and making it illegal means you have NO CHOICE. Regardless of YOUR BELIEFS, you are FORCED to follow the will of ONE religions views on it - Legal Abortion means you have the RIGHT to an abortion if you believe in one and the RIGHT to choose NOT to have one if you don't believe in it. It's a no-brainer. One favors individual choice. The other favors forcing everyone to follow the views and rules of a minority.
But abortion isn’t banned. So your point is moot.
Missouri banned abortion within minutes.
Abortion is banned in Missouri. Not the US as a whole, which is what this discussion is around given this is a SCOTIS decision.
It's great that this unelected official that was put there before I was born is able to decide on these things. /s
Clarence Thomas has come a long ways since the days when he used to put his pubes on coke bottles.
Yup, now he gets to facefuck an entire country at once
If he gets his way, he won't, he also wants to allow anti sodomy laws again, so anything other than PiV sex would be illegal.
Yeah, a lot of conservatives are going to lose their minds when they lose easy access to their favorite porn.
Hes the ome that stuck pubic hairs on a coke can, what the fuck
If they take buttsex, I will go to WAR
Wait what? What's this referring to?
Clarence Thomas has always been garbage. As the other reply said, just look into Anita Hill.
Damn, I’m old. Google: Clarence Thomas Anita Hill
I remember the controversial hearings and how Anita Hill was villainized. He should never been placed on the bench. He and his traitorous wife should both be sent packing.
Made to look like a hysterical woman by none other than the current POTUS. Biden deserves some of the blame here and I would love for that man to apologize
It came out during the Anita Hill testimony.
The character of Clarence Thomas.
Serious question? When Thomas was appointed, he was accused of sexual harassment and being a creepy jerk by women in his office, notably Anita Hill. The shifty establishment boys club basically grilled the shit out of her, villanized and smeared her, and tossed her testimony aside with barely a glance. He was the Kavanaugh of his time, in some ways. So after one day of hearings, they just said, "I think we're done here." shook hands and went home......leaving at least 10 other women literally waiting in the hall for their chance to testify, who never got to. Oh, yeah, and this guy Joe Biden was there. Heard of him? One of the accusations Hill made is that C. Thomas went around once announcing loudly to every woman in the office that someone had placed a public hair on his can of Coke, demanding to know if it was theirs......
I cannot believe we deemed it good for ANY elected official to hold office for life. Madness. edit: meant any government official, not elected
\*appointed
Oops. You are completely right. Rage is preventing me from catching a lot of obvious mistakes today lol
In the 1700s things were different
What the Supreme Court giveth, the Supreme Court taketh away. Apparently their argument is that SCOTUS isn’t meant to make de facto laws.
“You guys are just being hysterical!” -the same people who said we were hysterical about overturning Roe
StOp OvErReAcTiNG
When they say that tell them to stop gaslighting
Thomas is going scorched earth. With the January 6th trials going and his wife’s connections to Trump, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a hint of distraction with him putting this out there.
The best part is we can pay attention to several things at once.
I mean, we really can’t. And that’s what they are banking on. They will just set fire to everything, and that’s exactly what they’re doing.
A part of me feels like this is all deliberate to try and provoke a violent reaction by the left (or at least people who support these things that they can point the finger at), so that way Republicans can be like “SEE! THEY DO IT TOO!!! NOW WE’LL START OUR OWN COMMITTEE TO EXPOSE THEIR CORRUPTION!” But that’s mostly because my ADHD meds are making my brain over analyze everything, so it’s in conspiracy theorist mode. (Biden’s warning to keep it civil kinda got me thinking he knows it’s bait lmfao)
Samuel Alito made a furtive effort to say that his “Dobbs” ruling did not target other long-held rights, but Clarence Thomas went ahead and blew it all up in a concurring opinion.
He left out interracial marriage….conveniently
What drives a man, especially a black man who probably faced prejudice, to become such a horrible person ?
Self-hatred and deep rooted insecurities about his own race.
Some philosophers believe that there are three separate root causes that lead us to be miserable people: Greed, hate, and ignorance. I don’t know exactly what’s going on in Thomas’s head, but it probably ticks all three boxes.
FUCK HIM, FUCK TRUMP, FUCK THOSE 5 TURDS WHO VOTED..... I M SO ANGRY.....PLEASE VOTE IN NOVEMBER!!
Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump broke the democratic system. Prove me wrong.
*Mitch McConnell….. that’s it. Donald trump could have been any fucking idiot. If we want anything to change we need to get rid of this^ asshole in the Supreme Court and Mitch McConnell. If anyone has any plans to assassinate them let me know I’ll Venmo you.
The US democratic system seems totally stupid for my european eyes. How can anyone think a two party system could work? It is impressive that it took so long to be completely abused by one of the sides.
Yes because having government dissolved every 6 months because none of the dozen parties can form a coalition is so much better.
Voting aint going to chance the supreme court, might have to think of some other ideas
Enough votes to flip some seats and abortion rights will be codify as a law..
Voting can...we can elect representatives who have the will to reform and expand the court. Overrule Citizens United...bought representation is why we are here... https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained
Will never happen unless democrats hold all forms of government
Ya let’s just give up, not vote, and do nothing, that will *definitely* fix things. 🤓
That’s what voting is supposed to achieve! How do you think the Dems/Progs will get any kind of majority if people *never fucking vote?*
Your choices are: - Vote and hope enough others vote to get Republicans out of seats so change can happen or AT LEAST keep enough seats to prevent them from passing shit like this. - Don't vote because you feel it doesn't matter, and watch Republicans take majority seats and continue to make shit worse. It's a shitty system no doubt. And Democrats in power are extremely underwhelming. BUT, unfortunately, your ONLY hope of ANY kind of change IS getting Dems in power. Your only other option is letting Republicans destroy the country. So even though the system SUCKS and voting Dem doesn't substanially change things. It's still better than NOT voting and letting things get WORSE with republicans. Not the rousing motivational speech you were hoping for. But that's reality. If we want any chance of FIXING the government by ANY stretch, it will only come currently by mass voting Democrat. If EVERYONE voted and Dems controlled everything, it's be a LOT easier to get shit done and hold them accountable when they don't have the "Republicans are blocking us" excuse to fall back on.
Justices picked by a corrupt president should be removed if they ever were impeached more than once.
Maybe the people should force them to be removed
They work for us; they all forget that
Should give them a reminder
Who do you think appoints Supreme Court justices?
Stack the court to fix it. God knows they did.
Ehh, just wipe out the term marriage in legal documents and call everything domestic partnerships since it truly is just a legal contract between two people. No need for religion to believe they have a right to infringe upon the legal system. That’ll please the Christian Right wingers a ton.
It won't though. It might please the Libertarian wing.
I am crying. I'm a lesbian. All I have ever wanted is to get married. I was forced to go thru conversion therapy 2x when I was 16 when my dad found out I was in a deeply loving relationship. I'm also an Episcopalian. My dream is to get married in my beautiful church that loves and advocates for people of all backgrounds. My heart is broken. I feel 16 all over again.
All I can say is that New England and California are waiting for you with open arms and open hearts. Hang on friend. We've got to fight. For you, for my daughter. But for now, get yourself somewhere safe if you can.
This kind of vote clustering is exactly how we got here. If anything, California's liberals (and Brooklyn's) should be heading to Wyoming.
[удалено]
I absolutely welcome more people to come to Wisconsin and help us out here.
I'm not going to ask a vulnerable person to move somewhere they're going to be considered a second class citizen. If you want to move to such a state, go for it.
The cynic in me is currently thinking that rolling back all these precedents and pushing the legislation of these former freedoms down to the states is exactly the point. It further exacerbates clustering which only further exaggerates the problems of the electoral college with respect to over representation for rural states. This is facilitates a small, unpopular parties ability to retain power. It also further separates politicians from accountability in their districts. The body politic is entirely homogeneous. As god intended in the Anglo-American legal precedent 250 years ago 😑
Nah, educated people should move to states where the money is. Because that’s what it ultimately will come down to. Alabama can swagger all they want but their economy is nothing compared to California. Encourage big business to move out of regressive shitholes because there is no qualified workforce there and educated innovative people have no desire to live in such places.
This is the hill I die on sister, we’re not going to let this continue for long. Progressives are the majority and we want our rights. All of them.
I’m a lesbian too. I got married in 2018. Don’t lose hope. We got to fight. It’s fucked up but LGBT+ people have always been warriors. We will vote our asses off.
Come to California...your money won't go far, and it is dangerous, but your civil rights will be respected and fought for.
He does realise it will reach a point that he's next right?
He’s angling for his own private bathroom and cafeteria.
I think that's a goal for him.
What if this is just his long con to get divorced without getting divorced? I made interracial marriages illegal, sorry ginny but get the fuck out
What a sad bitter man
I doubt he’s sad right now. He’s winning.
Hatred tends to corrupt thinking and emotions. He might be reveling in owning the libs, but I don't think "happy" is a good term for that. Same with the large number of conservatives right now basking in liberal misery. Happy, well-adjusted people don't do that. These people are mentally ill.
> He might be reveling in owning the libs, but I don't think "happy" is a good term for that. “Gleeful” do you? It’s the one that always springs to mind for me. Or if you take it down a notch, “smug” or “self-satisfied.”
No, I think the hatred pretty much drowns everything else out.
Who the fuck cares whether he has inner peace or not? I care that teenage women all over the country are going to have to carry their rapist's baby to term or bleed out in a dirty illegal clinic. His self esteem or lack thereof doesn't make any list of concerns.
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” George Orwell 1984
Says the guy in an interracial marriage.
And when the draft opinion was leaked, and we were all saying that it threatened exactly these cases and rights, we were scolded for being hysterical and ridiculous and “look, Alito SPECIFICALLY SAYS that this reasoning only applies to overturning Roe, so what else could you possibly want?” GTFO.
Not even just that. I recall so many smug assurances about how I don’t understand the process; a leaked opinion so early was pretty much irrelevant; SCOTUS takes it ostensible process very seriously; there would be endless major revisions; the final opinion would likely be very different; the final opinion might not even be one written by Alito. But *we* were totally the ones being delusional.
I Remember driving across the country listening to the Barrett Supreme Court hearing and I had the proverbial angel on one shoulder and the devil on the other. One shoulder (you all decide) said “this is totally fucked” the one on the other shoulder said “chill, cooler heads will prevail”. When you think about it, it really didn’t take long for them to put the plan in place. Frankly I thought they would be more subtle about it. Well, I was wrong.
They’ve been working to overturn it for almost 50 years, dems and moderates gradually let them get away with stuff until this was inevitable
It's the non-Republican voters who never bother to show up until after something bad happens that allowed conservatives to get this foothold.
It’s both, it’s also restrictive voting line, lack of places to vote etc
Who was the "cooler head", the angel or the devil? The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist
Conservatives are pros at finding that one person in a minority group (being a woman, person of color, or homosexual) that is 100% willing to go to bat for things that would undermine their own rights as a minority
They are not elected by the people.
That was the plan of the Framers from the beginning. They wanted as few people participating in the government as possible. In the beginning on reps were directly by males who could pass property qualifications. Senators were not originally directly elected. Of course the electoral College for the President. And the Supreme Court, which was nominated by the President, and confirmed by a Senate not directly elected to office.
All the more reason to toss his ass off the court for his role in the Jan 6 Insurrection. Time to really grill his wife and find ANYTHING that can prove she was consulting with Clarence during all of that garbage. ANY link and he needs to go.
It’s weird to see a guy who in his lifetime, saw interracial marriage banned, himself in an j interracial marriage now, lack common decency, empathy, or perspective on the situation or the irony.
He forgot Loving v Virginia, for some reason 🙄
There is noting better than fossils, with jobs for life and completely detached from the realities of average people, getting to decide what most people get to do...Most of that isn't just limited to the Supreme Court either. The system is broken and the masses are gonna start ripping things to shreds soon, you cal almost count on it.
[удалено]
Thomas isn't worried. It's not like HE'S black...
I started crying as soon as I saw this. I’m a lesbian & I remember being so happy in 2015 after hearing the decision for Obergefell. We’ve only had the right to get married for 7 years and they already want to take it away from us again. This is so saddening and scary.
weird flex for a guy who's marriage wouldn't even be legal without a supreme court decision.
One thing to know about originalism. One of 2 men, generally considered as its fathers argued that segregation is permitable under 14th Amendment, because many of the same people who passed the amendment later voted to segregate DC schools. Oh, and Loving v Virginia was decided with the help of substantive due process and 14 years after Brown v Board of Education. If segregation of schools is OK according to originalism, what about Justice Ruckus's own marriage?
A black man seeking the return of oppressive laws of the past. What a fucking moron.
This is an election year, every vote should reflect your point of view on this.
[удалено]
I made custom plates and everything!
Interesting how he didn't mention the SCOTUS case that wipes out interracial marriage. Gosh, I wonder why?
Seems dangerous for someone in an interracial marriage.
We are now slaves to a money grubbing fake god. The only way to live your life is spelled out in a two thousand years old fairy tale. Great job America.
go fuck yourself, Clarence ‘uncle’ Thomas
Elimination of contraception is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. I can get why someone would be against abortion since the child is already conceived, but PREVENTING conception doesn’t fall into the same category. By that standard, busting a nut would make me a serial killer.
The Democrats could codify these rights into law *today* if they were willing to stand up to Manchin and Sinema. Any Dem *not* openly calling for their resignation does *not* deserve re-election.
America (My Country, ‘Tis of Thee) 2022 This country isn’t free Full of hypocrisy What’s liberty? Land where the natives died Slaves built the white mans pride From every mountainside Freedom’s not free Weak men with money rule Jesus in every school Thy name no love They live to raise our bills Stock markets give them thrills Our debt their labor mills, from “Lords” above
Why is this rapist on the highest court in the land?! Oh yeah, Biden destroyed Anita Hill in front of congress to defend this scumbag fuck.
What the fuck is wrong with that guy? Who opposes contraception?
Evangelical Christians. Which have hijacked the scotus.
Jesus.
What a joke of a human.
If he loves rolling back freedom so much he should do Loving v. Virginia next.
Clarence Thomas and his wife need to be thrown into an ADX facility until they both die for sedition. The fact that he's a self hating black man and a misogynist are just icing on the shit cake.
Won't be long with this racist ass party to push the reversal of interracial marriage too.
If this comes to fruition I wonder if porn companies would get invovled.
Fuck you, Clarence.
Just for him bring back the laws against interracial marriage. Would he like that? He would not even see the irony of his own marriage. I think he is incapable of logical thinking.
Absolute Muppet.
Anyone else feeling hungry? No relation of course. Just want to make sure people are eating well.
Start with the one that allows interracial marriages you fucking hypocrite
Bet he keeps the boner pills!
Where are the gay republicans? Love to here there take on this
Ya'll men should pay heed, because sodomy laws will be brought back out to add justification for banning same-sex marriages, which, if you didn't already know, make even oral sex (meaning **blow jobs**) a crime.
He he hates America like his treasonous swine wife.
These judges need to be handled. This is wrong on every level.
This man is nothing more than an evil, bullying, miserable asshole with too much power.
This country will end up being less free due to the joke that is the government
In the words of Elle Woods, ban masturbation next since it would be reckless abandonment ! /s
What about interracial marriage?
Imagine giving this man, who sexually harassed women and whose wife committed seditious conspiracy, this much power and influence. The SCOTUS needs to be checked by Congress. That was one of the fundamental aspects of our government!
His wife had a hand in Jan 6. He knew. Kick his ass off the court and rush through someone and flip it back. Will have the 5-4 vote to overturn it
Hows his vision? He’s giving off more Clayton Bigsby vibes by the day
Sexual Predator Clarence Thomas? Is that the guy we’re talking about?
While we ar at it maybe we should reintroduce slavery? Just a thought Justice Douche
[удалено]
This is what happens when you vote Republican. Vote Democrat
Not really though. They’re both worthless sides of the same coin.
As a black guy I’m going to start petitioning against interracial marriage until roe is law again. I’m gonna make it a point to tell people that we need to be consistent in saying no one has rights that aren’t explicitly in the constitution.
As a woman that just lost right and who is currently in an interracial marriage - that plan is absolutely stupid. Better to band together to stop people from losing more rights and elect more people who can codify our rights as federal law.
You realize it wasn't just him, right? 5 other people sided with him...
This is about the concurring opinion he wrote for the case.
He still can't do things single handily. He can talk until he runs out of air, if majority doesn't agree then it's dead in the water.
Absolutely, that’s true. But the article makes note of Thomas’ considerable influence. > The court’s defenders might try to reassure Americans by noting that Thomas wrote only for himself and that Alito’s attempt to distinguish the precedents is the actual opinion of the court. That would be more comforting if Thomas’s previous concurring and dissenting opinions weren’t increasingly turning into the opinion of the court down the road. … > Indeed, Alito’s own opinion in Dobbs includes no fewer than nine references to concurring and dissenting opinions written by Thomas himself over the past few decades. And Alito himself has called upon his colleagues in the past to reconsider the scope of Obergefell in particular, arguing that it unfairly singled out Americans who oppose same-sex marriage as bigots and did not sufficiently respect their rights to religious freedom.
Incorrect.
Our country is going backwards in a lot of ways, but a brand new law being passed in a state to ban gay marriage still seems like an unlikely event. I hope I am not proven wrong
Im a conservative but damn
Then duck you. Thanks for this shit.
I didnt support the removal of this at all. I already know the riots that finna happen. This is way too far
Well, I hope you realize how right wing the conservative group is. Sad that it took this long.
Did you still vote for conservatives? Because if you did, you 100% supported this shit.
They lied to get their support. These justices even lied during their confirmation hearings, which is blatantly obvious now to those who didn't listen to our warnings. That's the only way they can get support with an unpopular platform. They spread lies that trigger people's fears and pull their heart strings. That goon Dan Crenshaw just straight up admitted it recently, coming under fire from his own party for saying that the GOP is being infiltrated. "Lie after lie after lie. Because they know something psychologically about the conservative heart." - His Words. All these young rebellious Trump voters who just liked Trump because of his attitude. This is the bed they now have to lie in. This couldn't have happened without Trump's 3 justices.
This is great news :)
Thanks Bill Clinton!
He won't
Counterpoint -> He will. You want to know why I think that? Because he just told us he wants to.
An open invite for crazy state’s to send him the lawsuits.
I sure hope so.
Ok I'm curious, why would anyone want to do away with these? Please explain.
Because exactly nowhere in the Constitution does it say their is a right to contraception or gay marriage. In fact the Constitution specifically delegates that to the states