On October 11, 1991, faced with impending implosion of his carefully constructed law career, an incensed Clarence Thomas, one of two black men nominated for a seat on the United States Supreme Court — Thurgood Marshall was the other — lashed out at the Senate Judiciary committee, comparing his current plight to those blacks who routinely faced lynching in the not too distant past.
“And from my standpoint,” said Thomas, “as a black American, as far as I am concerned, it is a high tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas. And it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S Senate rather than hang from a tree.”
I remember sitting in front of the television as Thomas spoke, at age fourteen, still in the midst of learning how to navigate an abusive relationship with the United States of America. I felt for Clarence Thomas, who I ascertained to be an unfortunate victim of a well-coordinated smear campaign instigated by Anita Hill, a bitter and jealous woman who was anxious to see a nemesis fall. Upon hearing of his confirmation to the highest court, I pumped my fist into the air and said, “Good for him! Good for Clarence Thomas.”
It’s been thirty years since I’ve naively celebrated Thomas’ ascension — I’m forty-four years old — and my feelings for the man have drastically changed. Clarence Thomas was probably guilty of sexually harassing Anita Hill, a lawyer, professor, and graduate of Oklahoma State University and Yale Law School.
Thomas’ egregious behavior toward Hill should have precipitated his disqualification from consideration for a Supreme Court seat, but it’s not the main reason for why my opinion of the man has changed. His voting record, one of the most conservative of all of the nine Supreme Court Justices, is a reflection of a man who is bereft of compassion for men and women who look like him. He is a stubborn old extremist conservative, unable and unwilling to moderate his views with the passage of time. His typical response to traditionally underserved groups who come before his consideration is no. He’s one of those “pull yourself by your bootstrap” republicans. Racist people who are intent on maintaining the status quo adore the guy.
***
We need add a counterweight to Justice Thomas, preferably a black woman with a strong sense of identity, purpose, and empathy, a liberal someone who is an intellectual heavyweight, capable of fostering relationships with her fellow justices. This black woman would have to be a teacher as well, one who is capable of drawing from her experience as a black American woman with black children — the most vulnerable in our society. She could illuminate the minds of her conservative colleagues, who are either naïve, obtuse, or down-right hostile when it comes to affirming the rights of traditionally underserved groups in this country.
Chief Justice John Roberts, a staunch conservative appointed to the Supreme Court by George W. Bush in 2005, would benefit from some illumination from a smart black woman. His views on race spring from a fountain of naïveté. He believes people should just stop being racist, espousing this view in 2007 when he said, “The only way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discrimination on the basis.” John Roberts is ostensibly against race preferences for whites, but he is also steadfastly opposed to any efforts designed to help level a rigged playing field, buttressed by more than four hundred years of anti-black and anti-immigrant policies.
It’s that simple I guess, at least it is to John Roberts. If only it were.
In 2013, John Roberts, thinking that the world had gone colorblind, put forth a decision to scrap Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Roberts’ decision eviscerated the law, freeing states with a history of discrimination against black and brown people from preclearance procedures. So, states like Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas, places with a history of exhibiting racist aggression against people of color, are able to enact discriminatory voting laws without seeking permission from the United States government. Clarence Thomas, the one who complained of being lynched by Congress in 1991, decided to vote with Roberts and the other conservatives on the court. I guess Mr. Thomas wasn’t concerned with how the disintegration of the law would affect people who look like him. Because Thomas is the black conservative Supreme Court justice, a different thinker, special in ways many people could not begin to understand. Whatever, man.
Joe Biden has pledged to nominate a black woman for the Supreme Court. I think a black woman appointed by Joe Biden would have attempted to educate Roberts and the other conservatives on section 5, enlightening them on the fact that society can never be colorblind, as the colorblind society is no more than the musings of a thickheaded individual.
It’s been more than eight months since Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. He accumulated more than eighty-one million votes, with many cast by African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and Asians — more than four million Asians voted in 2020, forty-five percent more than the number who voted in 2016. Republican legislatures have responded with overt racism, attempting to curtail voter participation of non-white American citizens with voter suppression laws. These laws have been rammed through legislatures in Georgia, Arizona, and Alabama, states that would have been covered under preclearance if not for judges like Thomas and Roberts. And I think it’s unfortunate that Roberts, Thomas, and the other conservatives, ostensibly scholars and learned individuals with degrees from highly reputable Ivy-League universities, remain uncurious about the race issue. The Supreme Court is replete with conservative…simpletons when it comes to race.
There will be more cases centered on racial equity, abortion rights, and gun rights put before the Supreme Court during the next term: a small conservative group wants to end affirmative action, the state of Mississippi wants to effectively end abortion rights, and gun nuts want to make it easier to purchase deadly weapons. All of these cases will directly impact communities of color, people the conservative Supreme Court Judges cannot relate to.
Justice Steven Breyer, one of the more liberal Supreme Court judges, is eighty-two. He has been a reliable vote for progressive causes for twenty-five years, and he is appreciated. But he needs to step down before the next session, make room for the ascension of a young black judge like Ketanji Brown Jackson. Mrs. Jackson’s record as a judge reflects her intelligence, empathy, and humanity. She has voted to affirm the rights of Americans with Disabilities; has ruled in favor of unions; and acted as a check against the lawlessness perpetrated by Donald Trump and his merry band of cronies.
Mrs. Brown was recently confirmed for a position on the U.S District Court of Appeals, considered the premier pipeline for a Supreme Court appointment. The votes against her ascension to the court were many — forty-four of the one hundred active United States senators voted “no” — which suggests that her nomination for a Supreme Court seat could be contentious. The prospect of an intense fight should not deter democrats from supporting her nomination though.
Every member of the Supreme Court represents a segment of our society. Currently, there are no Supreme Court Justices who represent black women, a sector of our people responsible for demanding that white people see the inherent humanity of black men and women. The majority of black women know that racism has contributed to the degradation of black society.Clarence Thomas does not reflect this view, as he is cynical actor. He is one those conservatives who assumes he got to where he is without the help of anyone, and he wants other black people to embrace the myth of rugged individualism that is promulgated by proponents of the status quo. In fact, if it were up to Mr. Clarence Thomas, society would slide backwards, becoming a patchwork of black cities and white cities, separate and unequal. Mr. Thomas does not want Americans to put in the work to achieve a truly egalitarian society. And with a Supreme Court that is sixty-six percent conservative, he has naïve judges who will sign onto his view.
Clarence Thomas’s presence on the Supreme Court is a detriment to race relations, enlightenment, and progress. We need a progressive, black, female judge confirmed to the Supreme Court, a pioneer who can push back against Clarence Thomas and his antiquated and pernicious vision for this country.
Friends. Help me keep my status as a Top Writer on medium.com and give me as many claps as you can(look for the hands on the left side of the story and click, click, click).ep2ihenetu.medium.com/...