Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, 75, sparked raised eyebrows over his whereabouts when he was absent during oral arguments on Monday, and the Court provided no explanation.

Chief Justice John Roberts addressed Thomas’ lack of presence, according to NBC News’ Lawrence Hurley, saying that Thomas “is not on the bench today” but would “participate fully” in the two cases being argued based on the briefs and transcripts.

“Context that may or may not be helpful: In the recent past, Justice Thomas phoned into oral arguments when he couldn’t attend in person, allowing him to ask questions remotely. He isn’t doing so this time,” wrote Slate reporter Mark Joseph Stern on X, formerly Twitter.

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    If I didn’t call or show up a few times to my job I’d be fired. Different rules.

    • Gork@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sadly this would end up with another Conservative Supreme Court Justice since even though it’s Joe Biden’s pick, the Republicans would likely block it due to the precedent set about not appointing justices during an election year.

      • KnitWit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The Democrats have the senate majority so would be able to, but they probably wouldn’t anyways following the precedent of Dems not getting a Justice during an election year.

        • RunningInRVA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Joe Biden possibly/hopefully has another term. Obama did not. I think that’s the ”reason” McConnell felt like the next incoming President should choose. I don’t think Biden would give up a chance for a pick ever, but especially not if he has another term he could serve.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    "Context that may or may not be helpful: In the recent past, Justice Thomas phoned into oral arguments when he couldn’t attend in person, allowing him to ask questions remotely.

    His time on the Court has drawn plenty of ridicule, notably in recent years following an April 2023 report by ProPublica that found that he had accepted luxury trips almost annually for more than two decades as the beneficiary of Dallas businessman and Republican mega-donor Harlan Crow and never disclosed them.

    Last October, the Democrat-led Senate Judiciary Committee moved to subpoena Crow and other donors, calling it part of a wide-ranging ethics crisis.

    Crow told Newsweek via email at the time that any such subpoena would be "nothing more than a stunt aimed at undermining Justice Thomas, but his office would “remain committed to respectful cooperation and a fair resolution.”

    Thomas received more grief last month after participating in the Supreme Court’s decision to put presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump back on primary ballots in multiple states after he was removed in accordance to Section 3 of the Constitution, which bars former officeholders who “engaged in insurrection” from holding office again.

    The justice was encouraged by many to recuse himself based on the ruling and ties with his own wife, whose actions surrounding the last presidential election have been put in the spotlight.


    The original article contains 515 words, the summary contains 224 words. Saved 57%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the clock ran out on that to be honest. He’d probably agree to it anyway so long as that pos vacates.

  • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The most annoying part of this is that even if he quits wasting our oxygen, it’s “too close to the election” for the Senate to do their jobs and confirm the replacement.

    • macarthur_park@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah, democrats have a majority in the senate and republicans removed the ability to filibuster Supreme Court confirmations in order to seat Gorsuch. The 60 vote requirement was still in place in 2016 when democrats tried to fill scalia’s seat, and enough democrats were unwilling to change the rules to remove that requirement. Now that it’s gone there shouldn’t be any issue confirming a new justice.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If Donald Trump gets to appoint like half of the supreme court during his overall tenure I’m gonna shit his pants

  • BmeBenji (he/him)@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I thought it said “Clarence Thomas missing eyebrows” and honestly that would make his face look as soulless as his soul is