Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas hasn’t asked a question in a decade

[GMDino]

First off, this isn't new news.  It comes up fairly often and seems to bother some people.

Secondly, I am rather ambivalent about this.  If that is his style then I don't care.  Some may ask too MANY questions for some people's tastes.

But I do wonder if in the last ten years he has never even wanted clarification on something?  Something that did not get asked by another Justice? 

Being a good listener is one thing.  Engaging the person you are listening too is important also IMHO.



http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-justice-clarence-thomas-hasnt-asked-question-decade?cid=sm_fb_msnbc

Quote:Ten years ago Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas asked a question from the bench.


He hasn’t done it since.

The streak is a record — no other justice in modern history has gone more than a term without asking a question during oral arguments.

It’s also a source of curiosity and angst in the legal community.

It will also likely continue for some time. Thomas has shown no sign of changing his ways, issuing his opinions in written form and making little more than small talk with other justices when the court is hearing arguments — and, once, three years ago, cracking an apparent joke.

The last time Thomas asked a question was Feb. 22, 2006, during arguments on a death penalty case.

No one knows quite why Thomas chooses to abstain as he does. Some have pointed to his prior remarks about growing up self-conscious about his rural Georgia accent. But the more likely explanation is that Thomas believes he learns more if he keeps quiet.

“I just think that it’s more in my nature to listen rather than to ask a bunch of questions,” he told high school students in 2000. “And they get asked anyway.”

Thomas has also said he is uncomfortable competing with the court’s louder voices — which, until his death this month, included Justice Antonin Scalia.

Taking part in oral arguments is just one piece of the high court’s deliberative process. Lawyers on both sides make most of their arguments in briefs submitted beforehand. Justices use oral arguments to analyze those positions and to debate indirectly with their colleagues.

Preferring silence is not unprecedented, scholars say: Justice William Brennan, for example, was famously reticent during his late career.

Stephen Wasby, political science professor emeritus at the University of Albany, said Thomas’ approach hurts the process.
“He’s not giving the lawyers an opportunity to address his concerns. And I think he should,” Wasby said. “The others do. He should. That’s a legitimate concern.”

But scholars point out that the court’s increased volubility is more a recent development. Historically, they say, the court didn’t ask many questions during oral arguments.

That makes Thomas somewhat of a throwback. He’s better known for the power of his written opinions, which reflect his conservative beliefs and originalist interpretation of the Constitution and which scholars say are proving to have lasting impact on American law. His ideas about individual gun rights under the Second Amendment, for instance, have been influential.

Ralph Rossum, a law professor at Claremont University who wrote a book about Thomas’ impact on constitutional law, said it wouldn’t necessarily make Thomas more effective if he suddenly started to speak up.
“Obviously, Thomas knows he doesn’t ask questions and there’s a lot of criticism that he doesn’t,” Rossum said. “But he’s confident enough in his own skin not to care. He’s going to do it his way.”

[fredtoast]

The only question Thomas asked.

"Hey, Scalia, How are we voting on this?"

[Belsnickel]

(02-22-2016, 02:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The only question Thomas asked.

"Hey, Scalia, How are we voting on this?"

Interestingly enough you brought up something I hadn't thought much about. Thomas, knowing he isn't fond of talking from the bench as much, may well have already discussed issues with a fellow justice prior to arguments and so his questions are being answered. He could have teamed up with Scalia or someone else and said "you do the talking, I'll do the listening, we confer after".

[GMDino]

(02-22-2016, 02:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Interestingly enough you brought up something I hadn't thought much about. Thomas, knowing he isn't fond of talking from the bench as much, may well have already discussed issues with a fellow justice prior to arguments and so his questions are being answered. He could have teamed up with Scalia or someone else and said "you do the talking, I'll do the listening, we confer after".

If so, why?

Like I said, I can't image that in ten years he never heard something that made him want to ask a follow up question.  Even if he told someone else to task the questions before they started.

[fredtoast]

(02-22-2016, 02:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: If so, why?

Like I said, I can't image that in ten years he never heard something that made him want to ask a follow up question.  Even if he told someone else to task the questions before they started.

He had his mind made up before oral argument, so he didn't really care.

I'd say 99% of the time all the justices have their mind made up before oral argument, but they just like to play the debate game.  Thomas just does not give a shit.


The Justices have already researched any questions they had after reading the briefs.  They know the answer to the questions they are going to act.  I don't think anything in oral argument changes anyone's mind.

[Belsnickel]

(02-22-2016, 02:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He had his mind made up before oral argument, so he didn't really care.

I'd say 99% of the time all the justices have their mind made up before oral argument, but they just like to play the debate game.  Thomas just does not give a shit.


The Justices have already researched any questions they had after reading the briefs.  They know the answer to the questions they are going to act.  I don't think anything in oral argument changes anyone's mind.

Agreed on this. This is why after oral arguments you often have most of your speculation about how the decision will look. The questions they ask, and how they interact with each other, often tips their hand to how they are ruling. That decision was already made.

[GMDino]

(02-22-2016, 02:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He had his mind made up before oral argument, so he didn't really care.

I'd say 99% of the time all the justices have their mind made up before oral argument, but they just like to play the debate game.  Thomas just does not give a shit.


The Justices have already researched any questions they had after reading the briefs.  They know the answer to the questions they are going to act.  I don't think anything in oral argument changes anyone's mind.

(02-22-2016, 03:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Agreed on this. This is why after oral arguments you often have most of your speculation about how the decision will look. The questions they ask, and how they interact with each other, often tips their hand to how they are ruling. That decision was already made.

I'll bow to those with more knowledge of the process.

[Belsnickel]

(02-22-2016, 04:23 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'll bow to those with more knowledge of the process.

I just get kind of nerdy about government. Having a background in public policy and administration I like to follow things that will affect what I do. When court cases come up that are of interest to me I am one of those that is looking up the transcripts and reading decisions because I find that sort of thing interesting. I'm a big SCOTUSBlog fan as well.

[Benton]

(02-22-2016, 02:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: If so, why?
 
 

The real Clarence Thomas died 10 years ago. He's been played since then by Danny Glover.

Every so often it slips out when he mutters "I'm gettin' to old for this" and then rolls his head around.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-22-2016, 05:14 PM)Benton Wrote: The real Clarence Thomas died 10 years ago. He's been played since then by Danny Glover.

Every so often it slips out when he mutters "I'm gettin' to old for this" and then rolls his head around.

Explains why he kept saying he was gonna miss Riggs at Scalia's funeral 

[Rotobeast]

(02-22-2016, 01:54 PM)GMDino Wrote: But I do wonder if in the last ten years he has never even wanted clarification on something?

The last thing he asked for clarification on (Coke can) got him in a little trouble.

Could be a bit gun-shy ?

[Vlad]

At least Thomas stays awake.

[Belsnickel]

(02-23-2016, 10:33 AM)Vlad Wrote: At least Thomas stays awake.

She's just praying for the SOTU to end so she can get back to drinking.

[GMDino]

(02-23-2016, 10:33 AM)Vlad Wrote: At least Thomas stays awake.

At least she goes.

http://time.com/3672123/state-of-the-union-supreme-court/

Quote:Justice Clarence Thomas’s empty seat was also unsurprising. In 2012, Thomas said he doesn’t attend the annual event because “it has become so partisan and it’s very uncomfortable for a judge to sit there.”

[*michaelsean*]

(02-23-2016, 12:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: At least she goes.

http://time.com/3672123/state-of-the-union-supreme-court/

I wouldn't go either after the President decided it's OK to call them out in his SOTU.  

[GMDino]

(02-23-2016, 12:06 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I wouldn't go either after the President decided it's OK to call them out in his SOTU.  

Maybe they should quit then?

[*michaelsean*]

(02-23-2016, 12:21 PM)GMDino Wrote: Maybe they should quit then?

Ummm...no.  

[GMDino]

(02-23-2016, 12:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Ummm...no.  

Well if criticism or questioning bothers them....

[*michaelsean*]

(02-23-2016, 12:49 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well if criticism or questioning bothers them....

Yeah that's what it was.  Just regular criticism.  Or maybe it was a two year old who didn't like a decision and decided to whine about it at an inappropriate time.  

[GMDino]

(02-23-2016, 12:51 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah that's what it was.  Just regular criticism.  Or maybe it was a two year old who didn't like a decision and decided to whine about it at an inappropriate time.  

The State of the union is as appropriate a time as any when you ar POTUS.

Not like he could go and argue with them at the court.