Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas considers retirement, according to report

[danarhea]

The Supreme Court could soon have another vacancy, according to a report Monday. Conservative High Court Justice Clarence Thomas is considering retiring from the bench following the November presidential election, the Washington Examiner reported, citing “court watchers.”

One of those "court watchers", by the way, happens to be Thomas' wife, who called the report bogus. It is my opinion that, even if Thomas wanted to retire instead of staying in office until he died, he could be talked into staying for a while longer. The last thing I want for SCOTUS is for it to end up as an extremist body, in one direction or the other. While I value Roe v. Wade, I also value the 2nd Amendment. There is a fine balance that, if upset, could actually erode our Constitutional rights, should political ideologues of one stripe or another end up controlling the court.

Article is here.

 

[Anagram]

I'm inclined to believe that this is bogus. He doesn't seem like the type to knowingly let the court have a strong majority of beliefs heavily opposed to his.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

I'm inclined to believe that this is bogus. He doesn't seem like the type to knowingly let the court have a strong majority of beliefs heavily opposed to his.

But would he be willing to stay on the court and have his strong beliefs repeatedly challenged?

 

[Anagram]

But would he be willing to stay on the court and have his strong beliefs repeatedly challenged?

But retiring would give the liberals a 6-3 majority with Kennedy not even disagreeing with Thomas a significant amount of time. I don't know him, but he seems content writing all his dissents and concurrences right now even when disagreeing with the result. I can't imagine him allowing a completely liberal court.

 

[Beaudreaux]

I'm inclined to believe that this is bogus. He doesn't seem like the type to knowingly let the court have a strong majority of beliefs heavily opposed to his.

I saw this story yesterday in the Real Clear Politics news feed, and thought the exact same thing - Thomas isn't going to retire and do what he would see as harm to the nation, the court, the law, and the Constitution. Thomas will retire just like Ruth Bader Ginsburg will retire.

 

[Beaudreaux]

But would he be willing to stay on the court and have his strong beliefs repeatedly challenged?

That's no different than any of the other Justices. They all have strong beliefs, and it doesn't change their willingness to remain on the court when they are in the minority (in dissent) of a ruling. I don't know why Thomas would be any different?

 

[AliHajiSheik]

It is a shame that the same document can be interpreted so dramatically different as to make 1 persons membership to disruptive.

 

[AGENT J]

One of those "court watchers", by the way, happens to be Thomas' wife, who called the report bogus. It is my opinion that, even if Thomas wanted to retire instead of staying in office until he died, he could be talked into staying for a while longer. The last thing I want for SCOTUS is for it to end up as an extremist body, in one direction or the other. While I value Roe v. Wade, I also value the 2nd Amendment. There is a fine balance that, if upset, could actually erode our Constitutional rights, should political ideologues of one stripe or another end up controlling the court.

Article is here.

While I couldnt possibly agree more with you . . .isn't it sad that this is even a concern . .

 

[Helix]

he's more likely to ask a question or to vote differently than you'd expect him to than to retire.

 

[digsbe]

One of those "court watchers", by the way, happens to be Thomas' wife, who called the report bogus. It is my opinion that, even if Thomas wanted to retire instead of staying in office until he died, he could be talked into staying for a while longer. The last thing I want for SCOTUS is for it to end up as an extremist body, in one direction or the other. While I value Roe v. Wade, I also value the 2nd Amendment. There is a fine balance that, if upset, could actually erode our Constitutional rights, should political ideologues of one stripe or another end up controlling the court.

Article is here.

There will be no justice when the highest court in the land is an extension of a partisan political platform.

 

[AGENT J]

There will be no justice when the highest court in the land is an extension of a partisan political platform.

I agree 100% and the problem is two fold.

1.) its sad this is even a concern, that its even possible
2.) i'd say the vast majority of the people who are the problem (totally partisan) feel the same as us on this issue and don't even know they are completely partisan.

 

[digsbe]

I agree 100% and the problem is two fold.

1.) its sad this is even a concern, that its even possible
2.) i'd say the vast majority of the people who are the problem (totally partisan) feel the same as us on this issue and don't even know they are completely partisan.

That's because they ascribe to their own partisan view of justice. For partisan liberals and conservatives they have no problems ignoring our rights, trampling on our rights, or warping the constitution to support their agenda in order to shove it through as "justice." To them "justice" is getting their way regardless of what the rational letter of the law says. When a group of 9 people have the power to essentially re-write the constitution and make it say what they want it to say our rights are in jeopardy.

 

[AGENT J]

That's because they ascribe to their own partisan view of justice. For partisan liberals and conservatives they have no problems ignoring our rights, trampling on our rights, or warping the constitution to support their agenda in order to shove it through as "justice." To them "justice" is getting their way regardless of what the rational letter of the law says. When a group of 9 people have the power to essentially re-write the constitution and make it say what they want it to say our rights are in jeopardy.

again, i agree 100%
for me it always comes down to rights

 

[imyoda]

No big loss there......

With Scalia's death he is without a clue as how as to what to decide..........

... a ship without a rudder............and TG if he does

 

[tres borrachos]

One of those "court watchers", by the way, happens to be Thomas' wife, who called the report bogus. It is my opinion that, even if Thomas wanted to retire instead of staying in office until he died, he could be talked into staying for a while longer. The last thing I want for SCOTUS is for it to end up as an extremist body, in one direction or the other. While I value Roe v. Wade, I also value the 2nd Amendment. There is a fine balance that, if upset, could actually erode our Constitutional rights, should political ideologues of one stripe or another end up controlling the court.

Article is here.

It seems bogus to me. He doesn't strike me as the kind to retire at a time when he knows one way or another there won't be another conservative appointed to the court. Say what you will about the man - i know a lot of people don't care for him - but he's a passionate conservative, and he won't let Clinton or Trump take away any of his personal rights with some partisan hack appointment.