As promised, President Bush submitted the names of 12 controversial nominees to the federal bench. Despite claims by GOP senators that they're all well-qualified, that list includes some real doozies.
Bad as they are, none of them are worse than Clarence Thomas, who Bush 41 nominated for the Supreme Court in 1991 and who makes up half of Bush 43's judicial dream team.
Clarence Thomas is a walking, talking contradiction. He railed against racial preferences, yet was put on the Republican fast track precisely because he was an African American conservative.
His elevation to the Court was part of cynical Republican strategy: Find a member of a constituency that votes Democratic, then defy the Democrats to turn him--or her--down.
Thomas made matters worse during his confirmation hearing by accusing his opponents of carrying out a "high-tech lynching." If Johnny Cochran played the race card at the O.J. Simpson trial, Thomas and his White House handlers played the whole deck.
Using identity wedge issues is GOP SOP. It is to Republican strategy what the power sweep was to Vince Lombardi's Packers. They've have used it to divide Catholics (William Pryor), women (Janice Rogers Brown), and Hispanics (Alberto Gonzalez).
What makes Thomas's presence on the Court all the more infuriating is that he wasn't the best person for the job. Not even close.
If I put the names of everyone in my law school graduating class in a hat and pulled one out at random, there's a 95 percent chance he or she would be more qualified. The other five percent have passed away.
In his 12 years and change on the bench, Clarence Thomas has distinguished himself for three things:
(a) Being Antonin Scalia's caddie. If Vegas sports books took bets on whether Thomas would side with Scalia in a given case and you bet "yes" every time, you'd have enough money to be a Bush Pioneer. Maybe even enough to buy the Carlyle Group.
(b) Not believing in stare decisis, the traditional reluctance of judges to overturn earlier decisions. Instead of precedent, he relies on his religious beliefs in deciding cases. And did I mention that he's on the Court for life?
(c) Refusing to ask questions during oral argument. His excuse is that he was mocked for his Gullah accent when he was a boy--more than 50 years ago. Psst, Clarence, that is part of your job. A judge who doesn't ask questions is like a basketball player who refuses to play defense.
What provoked this rant about Justice Thomas was a story in yesterday's Legal Times about the by-invitation-only swearing-in ceremony he held at the Supreme Court building for Tom Parker, a newly-elected justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama.
That court recently made the headlines because Chief Justice Roy Moore was booted off of it after putting his religious beliefs above the Constitution, his state's attorney general (William Pryor, of all people), and his colleagues. In true BushWorld® fashion, he might get rewarded for his performance. He's expected to run for governor next year.
And wouldn't you know it? Parker is "a close protégé and former aide" to Moore. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Parker's reason for going to Washington? "Shortly after I was elected, I requested to be sworn in by Justice Thomas because if anyone symbolizes courage under fire, it's Justice Clarence Thomas."
According to Parker, Thomas returned the compliment, telling him that "the work of a justice should be evaluated by one thing and one thing only--whether or not he is faithful to uphold his oath, an oath which, as Justice Thomas pointed out, is not to the people, not to the state, and not to the Constitution, but an oath which is to God Himself."
God save this honorable court. Both of them.