Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Jan Crawford Greenburg - Justice Thomas's Misunderstood Role

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
7,505
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Feb 16, 2007

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/fora/showthread.php?t=642

Legal analyst and ABC News correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg discusses Justice Clarence Thomas's often-misunderstood role on the Supreme Court of the United States.

-----

Jan Crawford Greenburg talks about "Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States."

Drawing on unprecedented access to the Supreme Court justices, acclaimed ABC News legal correspondent Jan Greenburg offers an explosive account of the struggle to control the Supreme Court and the direction of the United States. -- Book Passage

  • likes, 1 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • He is his own man. That's to be applauded

  • "Jew" media? What the fuck is that supposed to mean. When you substitute your own prejudices for those against Thomas, you're no better than those you attack.

Video Responses

This video is a response to Clarence Thomas - The Virtues of Debate
see all

All Comments (46)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Thank you for posting this, ForaTv.

  • @sklanger Excellent point - and please don't get me wrong, I am no Justice Thomas basher. But for better or worse, every now and then the Supreme Court is faced with decisions that can have truly massive impacts on society - both present and future. Ordered liberty demands consistency, and thus to abandon stare decisis requires extraordinarily compelling reasons to do so (in my opinion). Check out Justice Breyer's dissent in Arizona v. Gant... Inexorable? No. But highly, HIGHLY persuasive.

  • @jpsartrean Stare decisis is not an inexorable command. Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 828 (1991). To give greater deference to stare decisis "in this area" but not others is to entrench one's policy preferences under the guise of selective deference to past decisions. His approach has the virtue of being consistent.

  • @sklanger For as great a legal mind as Holmes had, he was certainly not without fault... Consider his views in Buck v. Bell and forced sterilization. Regarding 'doctrinal construction,' while I would agree that creating laws/rights is beyond the proper scope of judicial authority, I also think Justice Thomas should nonetheless give greater deference to stare decisis in this area (for example, the Griswald 'right to privacy' caseline).

  • she's hot!

  • @dianeliebowitz whaaa?

  • that bitch is a nasty heeb.

  • wrong way to say it in regards to jewish people, but I think liberals expect all blacks to be beholden to their handouts and government cheese...I agree blacks need to wake up and get out of this dogmatic stage...take back personal responsibility

  • Thomas is the best justice, the man has guts.

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more