Mr. Justice Whoop-dee-damn-doo

We're working our way backward through the '90s. With OJ Simpson again on the national stage, it was inevitable that Clarence Thomas would follow. The Thomas confirmation hearings were a milestone in real-time mass-mediated American psychodrama. Before the Juice, there was Long Dong Silver. Before the bloody glove, there was the pubic-hairy Coke can. Before the suicidal white Bronco driver, there was the victimized black conservative martyr. Before there was OJ's jury nullification, there was Thomas' "high-tech lynching," which acquitted him right onto the Supreme Court.

I still recall being so obsessed by the Judiciary Committee hearings that I listened to them through an earphone while pushing a baby stroller through the mall. I remember watching Arlen Specter and Orrin Hatch hard at work, attempting to destroy Anita Hill, and finally understanding what the Salem Witch Trials must have been like. I remember being torn between awe at Chairman Joe Biden's pomposity and amazement at the goings-on in his scalp. I remember calling my friend Jack Rosenthal, then the editor of the editorial page of the New York Times, nearly every day, haranguing him to stiffen the Senate's opposition. To this day, I recall my revulsion at George H.W. Bush's cynically gleeful, preposterous attempt to frame the Thomas nomination as a filling of the Thurgood Marshall seat.

It turns out, of course, that the alarming character traits Anita Hill observed in her boss Clarence Thomas were nothing compared to the nutcase judicial temperament he has since revealed. At his confirmation hearing, Thomas -- like Marshall before him, and Roberts and Alito after him -- paid tribute to stare decisis, the importance of precedent in guiding Supreme Court decisions. But no less an authority than arch-conservative fellow Associate Justice Antonin Scalia told Thomas' biographer, Ken Foskett, that Thomas "doesn't believe in stare decisis, period." If you think nutcase is too strong a word to summarize that view, listen again to Scalia, as quoted in this Terry Gross interview with Jeff Toobin about his new Supreme Court book, The Nine:

Mr. TOOBIN: Clarence Thomas is not just the most conservative member of the Rehnquist court or the Roberts court. He's the most conservative justice to serve on the court since the 1930s. If you take what Thomas says seriously, if you read his opinions, particularly about issues like the scope of the federal government, he basically thinks that the entire work of the New Deal is unconstitutional. He really believes in a conception of the federal government that hasn't been supported by the justices since Franklin Roosevelt made his appointments to the court. You know, I went to a speech that Justice Scalia gave at a synagogue here in New York a couple of years ago, and someone asked him, `What's the difference between your judicial philosophy and Justice Thomas?' I thought a very good question. And Scalia talked for a while and he said, `Look, I'm a conservative. I'm a texturalist. I'm an originalist. But I'm not a nut.' And I thought that...
GROSS: Meaning that he thinks Thomas is one.
Mr. TOOBIN: Well, that was certainly the implication.
GROSS: Mm-hmm.
Mr. TOOBIN: It was pretty amazing. I mean, Thomas is well outside the mainstream, even of the conservatives on the court.

The Roberts-Scalia-Thomas-Alito-and-sometimes-Kennedy fivesome on the Court today is the closest the country has come to the domination of the third branch of government by the same ideology that gave us the Bush administration and its Congressional and Fourth Estate enablers. If Justice Stevens can hang on, and if Democrats can nominate and confirm his successor, there is a chance that the Constitution can continue to rely on the better angels of Justice Kennedy's nature. But even so, I fear that the first Monday in October has lost an essential element of its grandeur for years to come. When Justice Souter wept after the Bush v. Gore decision, he was not only mourning the naked politicization of justice; he was anticipating the tragic abrogation of the Constitution that we have experienced in the seven years since. No reaction to that silent coup is more appallingly prescient than what Justice Thomas now tells us in his memoir was his reaction when his wife came to him in his bath to say that the Senate had confirmed him 52 to 48: "Whoop-dee-damn-doo."

Follow Marty Kaplan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/martykaplan

Comments

[BinBaldwin]

Anyone who bought the Anita Hill 10 year old Pubic Hair Story is ignorant . I was shocked the Dems even tried such a thing . Bill Clinton paid the price for Anita Hill.

[Lane]

BinBaldwin-
It's thanks to ignorant people like you that we are in this mess today, stuck with a supreme court that is chock full of a nut like Clarence Thomas! Why would any sane, intelligent person get up in front of the world and perjure themselves? I was and am so very proud of Anita Hill for having the strength of character to try and stop Thomas' confirmation and the ensuing unremarkable career he has shared with us!

[phoenix09]

Ironic that you should call someone else ignorant while displaying your own ignorance. Anyone who has been sexually harassed by some self-loathing pervert knows that Ms. Hill told the truth about Clarence Thomas.

[kingofscotts]

REALLY???

Anyone who has been sexually harrased KNOWS that Hill was telling the truth.

Wow that's a hell of a statement even for a huffstar!

Oh and LANE: Why would anyone do it? Well unless you have been in a coma for the last 20 years you should know that people do insanse things everyday. In this case she had a very good reason. Hill did not want a pro-life justice on the SCOTUS.

She was fighting a war about abortion through Thomas.

[Stoyver]

Ignorant BinBaldwin? Ignorant of what? Do you know something that others don't? I suspect that you have nothing but animosity. Am I right?

[Grizelda]

No, Bill Clinton paid the price for taking on Big Tobacco. Thanks to Bill, we don't have to endure smoking in the work place anymore.

[JaseAllen]

The Republicans aren't the only people to blame for the current Court. Had the Democrats kept their spines and continued to oppose the Roberts and Alito confirmations, we /might/ not have some of the problems we do now. That seems to be yet another reoccurring theme for the last 7 years.

[daddysboy]

The Republicans are the only people to blame for the current court. Their nominations were confirmed. These were the most acceptable choices from the politicized grab-bag of bafoonery the republican party offered at each moment. Maybe Harriet Miers should have been appointed?

[spicegal]

I totally believe Anita Hill. You have to ask yourself what would this woman possibly have to gain by going up against someone like Clarence Thomas, and subsequently getting ripped apart by the Republicans. I think Ms. Hill had incredible courage, and she has certainly gone on to be quite successful in her own right. The sad state of the SCOTUS is all the more reason that it's imperative we remove the republicans from power. The Bush v Gore decision in 2000 was the icing on the cake. I can't think of anything more political or partisan than intervening in an election, taking the decision away from the state, not allowing a recount, and appointing a president. It's just shameful. In 2000, the people got it right when they elected Al Gore, and the SCOTUS took it away.

[Honest George]

Hate and Revenge-- Some have it and get over it.Some have it and carry it onto the Supreme Court.
I will never believe Ms. Hill was deliberatly lying on the Thomas Supreme court hearings. Some Senators conducting the hearing should be awardewd the P.Ah.award.
Come to think of it quite a few Senators deserve the P. Ah. award.
The official name of this award is the Pompous Asshole award.
Forgive the vulgarity but how else can the actions of these people be described.

[LadyD]

OMG, absolutely agreed! Even Senator Spector has since apologized for going after Anita Hill. However,I don't recall him apologizing for voting for Thomas.

[JEdgarH]

Spector apologized??? When???
I'm a Democrat from PA., but quite independent and I used to vote for Spector. That is until his Senate assault on Ms Hill. I would never vote for him again. Never, ever!!!!

A month ago or so we ran into Arlen at the local "indie" movie house as he came out of the men's room. No, he didn't do a "Larry Craig", but Arlen stared straight ahead and would not look anyone in the eye as he was passing by.

The movie playing was "La Vie en Rose", the life story of Edith Piaf.

[flatus]

The trick here, folks, is to raise hell DURING the confirmation hearings not after all is said and done.

We get the government we deserve.

[ChiefJudgeGascoigne]

I have been a one issue voter ever since Nixon made his abominable nominations. I would never have believed how much worse it would be with Clarence Thomas. In 1988 I would say you can judge the quality of the justices appointed by Bush and Dukakis by their selections for vice-president. Clearly that was presentient.

While there was every reason to vote for Clinton in my mind, there was no question he would qualify for my single issue. He loved/lovess the constitution too much to appoint a Clarence Thomas. Indeed he appointed two jewels.

In 2000 I had only to look at GWB and his record on the death penalty to expect the justices he would nominate. Actually his approved nominations are better than I anticipated. Miers was no surprise. However, Alito and Roberts vote their religious ideology. They just do not "get" the fundamentals of our constitution and our history. Would it only be that either of them had all the hidden merit and ethics of Justice Souter.

If I were a questioneer in presidential debates, my primary question would be: How do you feel about the confirmation of Justice Clarence Thomas?

The answers would show core constitutional concepts.

[NYDamien]

Part 2
The problem is, when we begin to come to, after we shake our heads, get the cobwebs out, and begin to come to grips with what just happened......it'll be too late. I think it's too late now. The reason the Republicans are so cocky, even as their poll numbers tank, is that they've fixed the game. "Check Mate" Believe it. And it gets scarier the more you think about it, and the more you try to think of scenerios to prevent the unthinkable from happening, the more panicky you will become. I think it's pretty clear. Bush and Cheney show no signs of being affected by the reality of the situation. The further they sink, in country and worldwide.opinion, the more belligerent and aggresive they become. Their machinery is in place. And, they have enough of a minority in Congress to do the trick: A forceful, united, disciplined, "base," a clear majority on the Supreme Court, a Justice department that, even after Gonzales, will be helpful to the administration, and the list goes on and on. Add to all that, a Congressional majority that can't get enough of being slapped in the face, and I think you could say the ballgame's over.
A lanslide "D" victory won't change anything. Sure,a Democratic President can help, but the die is cast. This Supreme Court will be the tie breaker for all further disputes, an that means.......we're dead.

[NYDamien]

This is a pretty good post so far, a lotta smart people throwing out some pretty good stuff. The tone is kinda dreadful and ominous, but you know what? The situation is dreadful and ominous. Oh, before I forget....thanks Marty, for a wonderful post, wonderful in the sense that it hits home.Of all the truly horrible damage this troubled, conflicted, and unprepared in both intellect and maturity President has inflicted on our country....... the worst is yet to come. It really is amazing. While most of us gaspped and bitched at the string of what we thought disasters, they just averted our eye contact, put their heads and shoulders down, and just kept plowing away. We kept on bitch'n, they kept on plowing, The problem is, their plowing reaped cumulitive results for them, and like a great General would do in plotting war strategy, Kept slappin us in the face, just a fraction of a second faster than we could yank our faces away. Kinda like in those old comedy skits: two guys are standing face to face, staring at each other, suddenly guy "A" slaps guy "B" in the face. Guy "B" is stunned, and before he can react, guy "A" slaps him in the face again. And so on and so on.
I'll finish up below....( I hope )

[slaphappyinannapolis]

The first order of business for the next Democrat to occupy the White House should be to appoint 2 additional Supreme Court Justices, who says there has to be nine?

[Lance734]

Well, Congress sets the number of the justices on the Supreme Court. So, the only way for your scenario to play out is if the Dems win a large enough majority in both houses of Congress to expand the Supreme Court from 9 to 11 justices. (Remember, the Pres. still has veto power, so unless a Dem committed to expansion wins the Presidency, the Congress would need a 2/3 super-majority to push it through.)

[YellowSpringer]

To all who vote to confirm people like Thomas, Roberts and Alito: One of the fundamental conundrums in life is that (we) liberals are often just too considerate and egalitarian for our own good. We tend to believe there's good in everyone, while the Neo-cons suffer no such fits of conscience (having somewhere along their developmental path learned the many benefits of suppressing it).

While I'm all in favor of a progressive leader uniting the country after '08, he (or she) needs to be at least half as maniacal and ruthless as these enemies of the Constitution if we are to survive as a nation.

[OutragedMom]

Awkward, yes, except that they both got away with something and are too dumb to stop talking......

[Purple Girl]

I'vwe always been a 'tom boy' and never concerned myself with the stupid antics of they guys- they tend to have a more 'base' sense of humor to begin with. When Thomas was accused of the childish conversation- I actualy felt bad for him. Frankly I think Hill had evry opportunity to speak her mind and if it was that bad- the opportunity to leave his employment- bu tinstead she followed him to his next appointment. Women are responsible for their own equal rights on adaily basis and should remember not every crude comment is directed or related to them. Do I approve of Boys being boys in the work place- NO. but they do. I also don't support women who shrink away from standing up for themselves- but running to HR to get the idiot fired.I felt it was an injustice to Thomas- even though I did not support his nomination, for the mere fact he did not uphold the constitution.

[MinerSam]

When Thomas was asked about his response to Anita Hill, he did not use it to claim innocense. Said: "What would you do if someone made broad aligations against you?" Sounding like: "What would you do if you were guilty? Wouldn't you too claim innocese?"

Anita Hill's alegations of sexaul harassment, were not broad but very specific. She said each time they worked on issues, he would turn the topic to sex, using graphic and disgusting language, and gave examples. Almost sounding like a confused child's interpretation his Grandfather words.

He is not conservative. Just as the rest of his movement is not. From those who control the executive, to Republicans elected to the legislative branch with rubber stamps.

Thomas is a Radical Right Wing Reactionary.
And the reactive minds displayed in the interview indeed sounded nutty.

Appears immature, with a chip on his shoulder, who never moved beyond Ayan Rand* in High School. Thus may be correct claiming that his law degree is worthless.

Former Radical left wing individuals
( w/operative word being Radial) have found a home under this Junta...a NO Nuance Conglomerate of the Lunatic Fringe that is the Republican Party.

Radicals who may have been tolerated but not respected on the left...who made people's eyes role. They have found a home among the looters of our treasury...the ones who were the Juvenile Delinquents...with the libertarians being their co-dependants.

*A previous biography of Mr. Thomas states that he makes sure to give aids the books of Ayan Rand to read.. a reactionary author of the "Virtue of Selfishness".. a roots of their "You're on your ownership society"

Reagan claimed welfare mothers were at the root of our woews. Karl Rove made sure Gay marriage appeared in 11 states. This arnered them 3 million votes.

They are not going away and each time come back stoner. Their current strategy includes going after the fysically conservative Democrats. To try to change electoral vote in CA, and to make affirmative action into the new Gay Marriage, to draw out their biggots.

[dooley09]

YAAAAAWWWWWNNNNN..,,,,, This is a non-issue! Just like the Anthrax fiasco....... Who cares? This is just more distraction from the real issue! IRAQ! BUSH! TRAITOR! TREASONOUS F-HEAD! ETC.............ETC...........

[SamEllison]

I think Justice Thomas is a paranoid bigot that should be impeached. Through his writing he tells us he cannot make an unbiased ruling making him incapable of serving as a Supreme Court Justice. All candidates for the House and Senate should be held accountable on this subject.

[live by the golden rule]

Yes, and the grounds were obvious before the confirmation: he lied under oath [Republicans don't care if someone lies under oath? well, only if it's a Republican liar, then that is nothing unusual.]

[jbgnyc]

Sounds like Thomas married his wife to spite his grandfather's warning. In fact, the entire feeling I got was a man full of bile for himself and just about everyone around him. No wonder he wanders the country on wheels. Wonder what he's running from?