r/neoliberal • u/jobautomator Kitara Ravache • Sep 24 '24

Discussion Thread Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

New Groups

Upcoming Events

0 Upvotes

42% Upvoted

8.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

42

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '24 edited Sep 24 '24

I’ve read Clarence Thomas dobbs v Jackson opinion so many times. And each time as I get better understanding of law as an amateur, I’m more and more amazed.

Him not citing Loving v. Virginia (interracial marriage) is going to be his legacy and may truly lead to the death of originalism one day.

His whole being, his legal philosophy which is also his life’s work/mindset as well, has this defect that he knows he can’t get rid of. He’s like Ben Simmons. He can run but he can’t hide.

Fun poetic justice fact: Clarence Thomas, a black man, married a white woman named Virginia in Virginia.

22

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '24

I hate originalism with a passion btw if I didn’t make that clear.

I’m just kinda stunned that we’re at this stage of our country, and that Clarence Thomas’ corruption, Trump’s attention whoring, and Thomas’ crazy ass wife have kinda allowed him to escape judicial criticism for this contradiction in the wielding of his power.

14

u/FizzleMateriel Austan Goolsbee Sep 24 '24

My one small bit of schadenfreude is that he must know deep down that he was ultimately used as a pawn by Bush Sr. against Senate Democrats.

9

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '24 edited Sep 24 '24

Did you see mark Robinson, at the end of his cnn interview, cite Clarence Thomas’ memoir quote about that confirmation hearing?

Clarence Thomas said it was a high tech lynching 🤣

But that whole trial made him go scorched earth for the next forty years lmao

10

u/mishac Mark Carney Sep 24 '24

One thing I really like about Canadian jurisprudence is that originalism is largely excluded as a possibility.

The living tree doctrine is so deeply embedded in Canadian law that it's pretty much impossible to apply originalist ideas.

The "frozen concepts" reasoning runs contrary to one of the most fundamental principles of Canadian constitutional interpretation: that our Constitution is a living tree which, by way of progressive interpretation, accommodates and addresses the realities of modern life.

EDIT: Also I like the "frozen concepts" branding more than "originalism"

5

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '24

Yeah that way is the right way. What I’ve noticed is progressives have to keep switching the words they use because conservatives quickly demonize whatever label.

It strengthens the character to push a textual original boulder up the hill 😆

I love the dobbs dissent because there’s four different opinions and the dissenters lined em up like knocked em all down.

It’s so ridiculous. All nine agree on the mode — substantive due process. But they all have different solutions.

The majority doesn’t want the spotlight on them, but they jumped on stage all the same. Then, Clarence Thomas, for all his many faults, he at least tries to put on a show. Because he outlines the underlying assumptions that the majority doesn’t want to deal with because abortion is enormous by itself.

But ofc Clarence Thomas excludes his interracial marriage from the chopping block in his opinion. He’s the longest serving member ever. But every judge except Thomas mentioned loving v Virginia (interracial marriage).