|
N: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/14/clarence_thomas_speaks_supreme_court_justice_breaks_nearly_6_year_silence.htmlquote:Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has famously kept quiet during the past six (nearly seven) years of oral arguments. That streak appears to have come to an end today, when Thomas, a graduate of Yale Law School, broke his silence to crack wise about his alma mater: V: Clarence Thomas owns.
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:38 |
|
|
Petey posted:V: Clarence Thomas owns. True story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
Green Crayons posted:Justice Thomas mentioned he loved cooking barbecue. I asked the good Justice if he had any personal deviations or special additions to make the dish his own. He claimed never to deviate from the original receipe. That's hilarious. Gotta give the man credit, he may be batty but he's consistent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
Petey posted:N: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/14/clarence_thomas_speaks_supreme_court_justice_breaks_nearly_6_year_silence.html Actually he's a bitter piece of poo poo and that joke is horrible
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 02:50
|
|
|
Lol. Thomas. Someone remind me, why does he hate his alma mater so much again? Was it  affirmative action or somehting like that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
Ah yes, justices in highest court tell awful jokes and then room full of smart people laugh like it's an episode of Married With Children being taped live, justice being done and being seen to be done
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
insanityv2 posted:Was it Exactly that, actually.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
insanityv2 posted:Lol. Thomas. Yeah he felt like he was patronized by affirmative action and that Yale is racist as poo poo generally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
Tbh, the way he has allowed it to color his jurisprudence is unethical, but I could totally understand feeling like a stigmatized outsider if I were a poor southern black in 1970s Yale and resenting it later in life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:No one is safe. Shoulda gone to med or pharm school. (Pharm school is next. The AMA actually regulates their grad numbers though so MDs are safe.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
HolySwissCheese posted:Tbh, the way he has allowed it to color his jurisprudence is unethical, but I could totally understand feeling like a stigmatized outsider if I were a poor southern black in 1970s Yale and resenting it later in life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 06:39
|
|
|
TenementFunster posted:Yeah, I'm sure being at literally the absolute top of his profession has given him a lot to feel resentful for. You saying you wouldn't feel resentful about spending a decade sitting next to Scalia?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 07:33
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:Ah yes, justices in highest court tell awful jokes and then room full of smart people laugh like it's an episode of Married With Children being taped live, justice being done and being seen to be done The best part is that Sotomayor followed up (or preceded, couldn't tell) with a comment about harvard/yale attorneys, and after everyone was done chuckling the attorney of record was like "Yeah or LSU" because they went there and no one laughed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 07:49
|
|
|
TenementFunster posted:Yeah, I'm sure being at literally the absolute top of his profession has given him a lot to feel resentful for. I always got the sense that he just generally resented things made of carbon. He knows he ought to be above the whole carbon-based fight for survival that the rest of us peons are on this planet pursuing, but instead he's sitting there trapped in that blob of flesh, at the whim of the arguments of those less than himself. And he's doomed to a lifetime appointment of sitting, stewing, lurking, waiting for his opportunity to burst forth from the malleable avatar known as his body.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 08:08
|
|
|
TenementFunster posted:Yeah, I'm sure being at literally the absolute top of his profession has given him a lot to feel resentful for. He wasn't at literally the absolute top of his profession when he was at Yale. In fact, he graduated with almost no job prospects and no help from the administration, only enhancing his perception of tokenism. That said, being a jobless Yale grad was probably caused by the same solipsistic lack of empathy that allows him to sit as the second worst justice on the Court. However, the way Thomas feels towards Yale is totally plausible and even a little sympathetic. I don't think you should have to forgive every perceived past transgression once you reach a certain level of professional success.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 14:27
|
|
|
HolySwissCheese posted:He wasn't at literally the absolute top of his profession when he was at Yale. In fact, he graduated with almost no job prospects and no help from the administration, only enhancing his perception of tokenism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Clarence Thomas best justice. Deal with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
Direwolf posted:The best part is that Sotomayor followed up (or preceded, couldn't tell) with a comment about harvard/yale attorneys, and after everyone was done chuckling the attorney of record was like "Yeah or LSU" because they went there and no one laughed. Is it bad that it took me a moment to remember what LSU was? I'm all like, Law School of Uzbekistan? What? Anyway, apropos of nothing, I made some more mangas. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
Clarence Thomas is the most powerful comic book nerd in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
ragle posted:Actually he's a bitter piece of poo poo and that joke is horrible Any joke at a law school's expense is a good joke. Can't blame the man for being disgusted with yale, american legal academia is an institutional manifestation of shame and moral failure. All that unwarranted elitism, based on the most horrid and crass grounds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
Agesilaus posted:Any joke at a law school's expense is a good joke. Can't blame the man for being disgusted with yale, american legal academia is an institutional manifestation of shame and moral failure. All that unwarranted elitism, based on the most horrid and crass grounds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
TenementFunster posted:He notion that he would have had an easier time of things with a degree from anywhere else is laughable. What do you think is a bigger impediment to the job prospects of a young attorney: having a degree from the best law school in the nation, or being black in Missouri in the 70s? Chalking up personal adversity to a great education opportunity instead of pervasive racism is another symptom of Thomas being terminally wrongheaded. I don't think that notion was at all implied. It has that has to do with the daily microaggressions you perceive as a token minority in one of the great bastions of white privilege in our country. Sure, it was lucrative and worthwhile, etc., but in the years he was at Yale and then the years shortly after, he was an awkward outsider and then an unemployed awkward outsider. That was the truth of his life when his views towards Yale were formed. You could say that the emotional problems that are evident in his writings are the real root cause of his problems in the 70s, but its still a sympathetic situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:Is it bad that it took me a moment to remember what LSU was? I'm all like, Law School of Uzbekistan? What? All you need now is Law and Order on some TV in the background and a copy of To Kill a Mockingbird on the desk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
The box says 8 years ago but the posters say 18 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
gret posted:Clarence Thomas best justice. Deal with it. The only pro-weed justice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
diospadre posted:The box says 8 years ago but the posters say 18 years ago.  Obviously the comic was made 10 years ago!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
HolySwissCheese posted:He wasn't at literally the absolute top of his profession when he was at Yale. In fact, he graduated with almost no job prospects and no help from the administration, only enhancing his perception of tokenism. Who's the worst?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
sigmachiev posted:Who's the worst? I heard Scalia was the best.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 08:40
|
|
|
sigmachiev posted:Who's the worst? Kennedy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 09:45
|
|
|
sigmachiev posted:Who's the worst? Roberts, that insufferable segregationist motherfucker.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
It's always funny, and always sad, to hear law students and young attorneys go on about the united states supreme court justices. I literally don't know their names, outside the obvious ones like scalia; does anyone think that following scotus like some sort of popular sports tournament is a worthwhile habit for attorneys? I mean, I use their opinions when I'm writing briefs and motions in order to lay out the general foundation and framework for my argument, but the meat and potatoes almost always comes from lower court decisions and the individual lawyer's way of working it all together. You'll likely never practice in front of them, you can't predict their opinions in any helpful or financially profitable manner, and it seems unanimous that they're all tossers from schools that have nothing to do with practicing law. Is following the supreme court just some form of imitation at following a court with daily relevance to professional practice, engaged in by law students and young professionals? I was approached by another young attorney who said, ” hey you're a law guy, what do you think about the upcoming opinion in the (I think he said affirmative action but I forget)”, and after getting over my initial confusion all I could come up with was, ” oh those fuckers, why would I know anything about that lot.”
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
Agesilaus posted:It's always funny, and always sad, to hear law students and young attorneys go on about the united states supreme court justices. I literally don't know their names, outside the obvious ones like scalia; does anyone think that following scotus like some sort of popular sports tournament is a worthwhile habit for attorneys?  I read every oral argument transcript and every opinion from the US Supreme Court. No relevance to my practice other than sporadically, but 1) I think I should know what the US Supreme Court is doing and 2) I find the oral arguments interesting in terms of how arguments are presented and challenged. Could I do the same thing with the Georgia Supreme Court of the 11th Circuit? Yes, in theory, but in light of the number of opinions and the fact that the 11th Circuit only sells CDs of oral argument for $30, not practical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
Keeping up with the Supreme Court is pretty important if you care at all about national policy issues. If you have any personal curiosity about any of these topics, you too may wish to know a little more about the Court and its members' views: -Affirmative action in college admissions -Racial diversity in public schools -Whether and how the Affordable Care Act will be implemented -Gay marriage -Female pay disparities -How large can a class in a class action suit be before Scalia blinks? -Gun control -The racial makeup of congressional districts for elections These issues and more have been before the Court in the last 5 years. If you go back farther than 5 years, you'll find questions like -How little due process can we get away with providing to prisoners? Not so fast, what if we keep them off-shore and also they are Muslim? -Which presidential candidate in the 2000 presidential election will get to be president starting in January 2001? My Congressman's district was affected by a Supreme Court decision handed down this year. Sometimes the Court does things that any civic-minded person should be aware of, even if he isn't a lawyer practicing before it. HolySwissCheese fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Jan 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
HolySwissCheese posted:Keeping up with the Supreme Court is pretty important if you care at all about national policy issues. If you have any personal curiosity about any of these topics, you too may wish to know a little more about the Court and its members' views: Adding: -When will Scalia just admit that he thinks the Confrontation Clause means that the Defendant and witness go into the Thunderdome? -When will the conservative justices abolish consumer cases entirely and send everything to arbitration?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:Adding: I find both of these things very attractive propositions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:I find both of these things very attractive propositions. Antonin, is that you?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
ulmont posted:
Nice game tryhard, thanks for playing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:Nice game tryhard, thanks for playing. I've been practicing for 6 years now, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
HolySwissCheese posted:Keeping up with the Supreme Court is pretty important if you care at all about national policy issues. If you have any personal curiosity about any of these topics, you too may wish to know a little more about the Court and its members' views: Yeah, this. I'm not even a lawyer--I'm a court administrator--and I keep up with the issues that interest me, just out of basic professional curiosity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:38 |
|
|
Agesilaus posted:It's always funny, and always sad, to hear law students and young attorneys go on about the united states supreme court justices. I literally don't know their names, outside the obvious ones like scalia; does anyone think that following scotus like some sort of popular sports tournament is a worthwhile habit for attorneys? I mean, I use their opinions when I'm writing briefs and motions in order to lay out the general foundation and framework for my argument, but the meat and potatoes almost always comes from lower court decisions and the individual lawyer's way of working it all together. DA doesn't care what the supreme court has to say. Insert joke here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 20:20
|
|