Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Justice Clarence Thomas Rips SCOTUS, and No Lives Matter
Whenever Justice Thomas calls out his colleagues on the Supreme Court, I am almost always delighted for a number of reasons. For one, his comments are incisive; for another, he usually represents my own views. And finally, in this particular case, he spoke up on the issue of life and death :
When addressing juvenile murderers, this Court has stated that ‘children are different’ and that courts must consider ‘a child’s lesser culpability,’ Thomas wrote. ‘And yet, when assessing the Court-created right of an individual of the same age to seek an abortion, Members of this Court take pains to emphasize a ‘young woman’s’ right to choose.
The ruling was regarding the effort to set limits on life sentences for juvenile criminals:
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected imposing limits on sentences for life without parole for minors. The 6-3 ruling reverses a trend toward more leniency for children and teens convicted of a crime and highlights the court’s strong conservative advantage. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was joined by the two other liberal judges in her dissent. She wrote, ‘The question is whether the state, at some point, must consider whether a juvenile offender has demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation sufficient to merit a chance at life beyond the prison in which he has grown up. For most, the answer is yes.’
Justice Sotomayor’s statement is foolish on its face. How is anyone able to tell the “maturity and rehabilitation” of a child who has committed murder?
So, it’s ironic that Justice Sotomayor thinks she can see into the future of a juvenile criminal (which is impossible) but she is indifferent to the babies whose future is destroyed for the convenience of their mothers? She has mercy for juvenile killers, but no mercy for the child who will have no chance at life.
In this case, the Court realized that, juvenile or not, there can be no sentence but mandatory life. At least those juveniles’ lives will be spared.
The fact that Planned Parenthood kills 247 black babies every day might be important to tell Americans; white Americans abort at 1/5 that rate. America, in spite of the incessant brainwashing of the Left, has started to shift its view:
Consider the left’s now standard language on abortion. While the majority of Americans continue to believe that abortion should be legal in the first trimester, public opinion has been drifting more and more pro-life. Solid majorities oppose abortion in the second and third trimester. Late term abortion is hugely unpopular, as is taxpayer funding of abortions. Furthermore, abortion itself is not seen as something positive. You are, after all, killing the human being in the womb.
Even more, people are realizing that there is a moral issue involved with abortion; women’s right to healthcare and her right to choose, in contrast to the life of a baby, sounds narcissistic and petty.
* * * * *
The mismanagement of the current administration is becoming impossible to hide. People slowly but surely are waking up to the fact that the people running the country are ideological, not patriotic, committed to disunity and chaos, not to exceptionalism and national security. Joe Biden wants to be loved by other countries, not respected. He doesn’t care about a self-sufficient and prospering electorate, only a dependent and helpless people. He doesn’t care who dies in the streets, unless the police are the ones shooting. Those of us who are white are systemic racists, so why should anyone care about us, except on election day?
And Joe Biden doesn’t really care if black people or white people live or die.
Certainly not if they’re babies.
Published in Domestic Policy
Well put, Susan.
Thanks, Jim. It was shocking to realize that to this administration, it is true: no lives matter.
I’ve never understood how anyone can be in favor of abortion but against the death penalty.
Any other combination makes sense.
If you’re unconvinced of the value of human life, and you’re in favor of both, well, ok.
If you think human life is sacred, and you’re against both, well, ok.
If you can tolerate the death penalty for criminals in the spirit of public safety or something, but you can’t imagine killing babies, well, ok.
But anyone who thinks killing babies is ok but not convicted murderers – that’s just incredible. There is no way that makes any sense.
And the most amazing thing is, probably 90% of Democrat voters think this way. They have been convinced to believe in two things that make no sense together. But yet, they believe. I couldn’t convince one person to believe in such mutually exclusive ideas. Impossible. But the Democrats convinced not just one person, but tens of millions of people. Many of them very intelligent.
How did the Democrat party accomplish such an amazing feat?
I’ve given up trying to understand the thinking of Democrats. What little they do.
I love Justice Thomas’ writing. Cuts like a knife. From the case at hand, Jones v. Mississippi:
This is writing that any functionally literate reader can understand, and the cool, perhaps amused, contempt drips off the page.
I’m not sure it can be called ‘thinking,’ at least for their great, unwashed mass supporters. They’ve been conditioned to believe any words that come from a leftist’s mouth as truth, and are positions to be advanced.
Clarence Thomas is the finest SCOTUS of my lifetime, even better than Antonin Scalia.
It has always seemed to me that the most succinct difference between conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats is that Republicans believe in guns to defend oneself and the death penalty for murder, but oppose abortion; while the Democrats oppose defending oneself and capital punishment but defend abortion. It’s been that way all my life.
I think the only commonality in reasoning for Democrats is that they are already here, and to the victor belong the spoils.
Well said.
Agree with Manny. Clearest writer on the Court I have ever read. And been reading S.Ct. cases since 1967.
Maybe he just hires the best law clerks. Who were English majors in college.
Intelligence and moral sanity do not always go together, Dr. Bastiat.
Nor intellectual consistency.
I don’t think he hires English majors. Their writing is clear and readable.
This is the first time I’ve seen “sanity” used correctly in a non-legal sense.
And intelligence and intellectual coherence do not always go together either.
Added: Oh, I see philo got here first.
It’s not about sense, it’s about having the correct opinions.