You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Justice Clarence Thomas’ tag.

Dem Congresswoman Seeks “Retroactive Recusal” Of Justice Thomas’ Rulings

 
 
Playing${title}

${entry_id}

 
 

Countdown reports: “Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) explores the failure of Justice Clarence Thomas to disclose that his wife made millions of dollars from clients whose cases were decided by the Supreme Court.”

Tonight, Rep. Slaughter revealed on “Countdown” with Keith Olbermann that she’s exploring “retroactive recusal” in cases like Citizens United, which would nullify Thomas’ vote and overturn the ruling.

“There is such a thing as a retroactive recusal, we’re looking into that. That case (Citizens United), if you remember, was decided 5-4. If we could take away his vote, we can wipe that out. It would lose,” Slaughter explained.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/04/dem_congresswoman_seeks_retroactive_recusal_of_justice_thomas_rulings.html

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas – his impartiality under attack from liberals because of his attendance at a meeting of conservative donors sponsored by the Koch brothers and his wife’s tea party activism – struck a defiant tone in a Saturday night speech in Charlottesville, Va., telling a friendly audience that he and his wife “believe in the same things” and “are focused on defending liberty.”

Delivering the keynote speech at an annual symposium for conservative law students, Thomas spoke in vague, but ominous, terms about the direction of the country and urged his listeners to “redouble your efforts to learn about our country so that you’re in a position to defend it.”

He also lashed out at his critics, without naming them, asserting they “seem bent on undermining” the High Court as an institution. Such criticism, Thomas warned, could erode the ability of American citizens to fend off threats to their way of life.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/50277.html#ixzz1FBuMyMVd

Be sure to check out some of the “racist” comments from the left!

Ah yes. Progressive liberal Democrats. The party of the minorities, the “poor”, the oppressed. Last I checked Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was an African-American who although he is conservative, progressives should be for him right? Nah, not really. At an anti Koch Brothers rally, progressive leftists loons called for Thomas’ lynching! Those evil teabaggers! Oh wait, it’s not them either, thought everyone in the media claims it’s the tea party that are the racists. These same peace loving, racial tolerant “progressives” all want to send Thomas back “to the fields.” Check the following video (be forewarned it contains profanity):

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2011/02/03/progressives-call-for-the-lynching-for-supreme-court-justice-clarence-thomas/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FireAndreaMitchell+%28Fire+Andrea+Mitchell%21+Exposing+Liberal+bias+cause+the+MSM+doesn%27t+have+to.%29&utm_content=Twitter

For the article on Thomas’ appearance at Stetson law School: http://www.freedomslighthouse.com/2010/02/justice-clarence-thomas-hits-nyt-and.html

     After nearly two decades on the United States Supreme Court, Associate Justice David Souter is announcing that he will be retiring from the bench. He is expected to serve until his replacement is nominated by Pres. Barack Obama and conformed by the Senate.

       Justice Souter was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1990 by Pres. George H.W. Bush. Souter was initially cast as a conservative on the Court, but has moved toward the liberal side, voting most often with the liberal side of the present Court. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer are generally thought of as the Court’s liberal wing.

     The retirement of Justice Souter presents the Obama White House with its first big test of establishing the Obama agenda for the longterm. It is thought that this Presidency will have the opportunity to make two, if not three, appointments, given Justice Stevens age (88), and Justice Ginsberg’s health. Given that all three of these Justices make up the present liberal wing, an appointment of a Justice with similar ideology may well have little affect on the Robert’s Court. Additionally, given the fact that Souter was initially appointed for his conservatism, it is not out of the realm of possibility that at least one Obama appointee may disappoint his leftist base.

      And it is that “base” that will now be Obama’s test. His first federal judge appointee is an avid ACORN fundraiser and supporter. His challenge for his appointee for Souter’s seat will be to satisfy his base while at the same time not appearing to be leaning too far off the centrist view. An initial list of possible appointees has probably already been prepared, particularly in light of Justice Ginsberg’s cancer surgery. But she has made it clear that she has no intentions of stepping down in the near future.

       Whoever the appointee is, they will be in for a volatile confirmation process, so let’s hope the vetting is far better than it has been for the Cabinet positions.

Update: As of 1:45pm EST, there had been no official announcement from the Court, and Pres. Obama deferred any questions about Souter’s retirement. It had been noted in recent weeks that Souter was the only Justice who had not yet hired law clerks for the next session.

UPDATE: Pres. Obama interrupted  his Press Secretary, ROBERT GLIBB, to announce that he had spoken with Justice Souter, and had accepted his resignation. Let the Judicial Games begin!

 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/us/02search.html?hp     

     The Honorable Justice Clarence Thomas, apponited by President George HW Bush in 1991, seems to think that, at least on its face, that the citizenship questions hovering over Barack Obama, should at least be reviewed.

     Procedurally, both the Leo Donofrio case (against the NJ Secretary of State) and the Philip Berg case (against Obama and the DNC) were submitted to the Supreme Court Justice responsible for the circuit they lie in, which, in both cases, fell to Justice Souter. As we are all aware, Justice Souter denied the writs for emergency stays.

     Historically, they would have been the end of it. Although the Rules of Procedure permit the case to be resubmitted at that point to “any” of the Justices, rare is the occasion that another Justice moves the case to the conference agenda for discussion, out of a basic respect for the original Justice.

      Justice Thomas may believe that the matter should be heard, or he may have done this as a means of getting the Justices en masse to deny Donofrio’s case. Either way, his action is rare among the Justices.