Appearance
Clarence Thomas
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022)
AP News:
Supreme Court strikes down New York concealed-carry law (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
- Thomas created a new “history and tradition” test critics say was historically inaccurate and ideologically driven.
- Some argue he should have recused because Harlan Crow–funded groups filed amicus briefs supporting the outcome.
- Impeachment advocates cite this as an example of Thomas issuing rulings aligned with donor interests.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) — Thomas Concurrence
AP News:
Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; Thomas urges reconsidering other rights (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
- Thomas explicitly called for reconsidering Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell, which critics say signals an agenda to dismantle privacy‑based rights.
- Some argue he should have recused due to Ginni Thomas’s political activism around related issues.
- Impeachment advocates frame this as an abuse of judicial power to advance ideological goals.
Haaland v. Brackeen (2023) — Thomas Dissent
AP News:
Supreme Court upholds Indian Child Welfare Act (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
- Thomas’s dissent attempted to revive long‑discredited anti‑tribal sovereignty doctrines.
- Critics argue his position aligns with conservative legal networks tied to donors.
- Impeachment advocates cite this as part of a pattern of decisions undermining Indigenous rights.
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/UNC (2023) — Thomas Concurrence
AP News:
Supreme Court ends affirmative action in college admissions (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
- Critics argue Thomas misrepresented Reconstruction history and civil‑rights jurisprudence.
- Some impeachment advocates say the concurrence reflects ideological activism rather than neutral judging.
- This case is frequently cited as part of a broader pattern of extreme originalism.
Biden v. Nebraska (2023) — Thomas Concurrence
AP News:
Supreme Court blocks Biden's student loan forgiveness plan (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
- Thomas embraced an aggressive version of the “major questions doctrine,” which critics say was invented to block Democratic policies.
- Some impeachment advocates cite donor ties to groups opposing loan forgiveness.
- Critics argue this reflects a pattern of rulings aligned with political benefactors.
Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) — Thomas Concurrence
AP News:
Supreme Court upholds federal abortion procedure ban (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
- Critics cite this as part of a long‑term pattern of Thomas using jurisprudence to advance ideological goals.
- Often referenced alongside undisclosed gifts from donors active in anti‑abortion advocacy.
- Impeachment advocates argue the ethical conflicts taint the legitimacy of his abortion‑related rulings.
McDonald v. Chicago (2010) — Thomas Concurrence
AP News:
Supreme Court extends gun rights nationwide (AP News)
Why critics think it’s impeachable:
Thomas attempted to revive the long‑abandoned Privileges or Immunities Clause doctrine.
Critics argue this reflects radical constitutional revisionism.
Impeachment advocates cite this as part of a pattern of extreme originalism tied to ideological networks.
|