Supreme Court's Thomas goes 5 years without questions

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas hit a milestone Tuesday by not asking a single question during the morning's oral arguments. It has been five years since Thomas uttered a question to a lawyer arguing a case.

• 
  By H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY
  Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' silence has drawn curiosity and criticism over the years and this five-year anniversary comes at a point when some activists have raised concerns about his off-the-bench behavior.

Enlarge

By H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' silence has drawn curiosity and criticism over the years and this five-year anniversary comes at a point when some activists have raised concerns about his off-the-bench behavior.

Thomas, named to the bench in 1991 by the firstPresident Bush, was generally a silent justice from the start, although he did ask questions on occasion. His last public query came Feb. 22, 2006, in a death penalty case from South Carolina testing when certain forensic evidence should be admitted at trial.

• TUESDAY: Court rules against parents in drug vaccine case

• SUPREME COURT: USA TODAY's full coverage

• CASE LOG: Follow the court's major cases this term

Thomas, 62, has given many explanations through the years for his unwillingness to speak up during the hour-long sessions that supplement the written briefs submitted in a case.

"I had grown up speaking a kind of dialect," Thomas, who was born in Pin Point, Ga., and raised by his grandparents in nearby Savannah, told a group of students in 2000. Classmates "used to make fun of us. ... I just started developing the habit of listening. ... I didn't ask questions in college or law school. I could learn better just listening."

More recently, Thomas said he thought lawyers should be able to do more of the talking during the hour-long sessions, to better explain their legal positions.

"I think there are far too many questions," he said in a 2009 interview with C-SPAN. "Some members of the court like that interaction. ... I prefer to listen and think it through more quietly."

Referring implicitly to how active his eight colleagues are in their questioning, Thomas said, "I think you should allow people to complete their answers and their thought and to continue their conversation. I find that coherence that you get from a conversation far more helpful than the rapid-fire questions. I don't see how you can learn a whole lot when there are 50 questions in an hour."

Racial cases

In earlier years, Thomas, the nation's second African-American justice, often would speak up in cases with a racial dimension. During a December 2002 dispute over whether states could outlaw cross burning, he recalled the Ku Klux Klan's campaign of violence and lynching in the South.

"This was a reign of terror, and the cross was a symbol of that reign of terror," he said. "It is unlike any symbol in our society."

The following April 2003, when the justices ruled 6-3 that states may prosecute people for burning crosses as long as it was shown the burning was intended to intimidate someone, Thomas agreed with the bottom line judgment but wrote a separate opinion saying cross burning should not be protected as free speech under any circumstances.

In a separate 1995 case over a KKK cross, he challenged the notion that it could be a religious symbol that touched on the constitutional requirement for separation of church and state.

Also in 1995, he asked questions in a dispute over when legislatures could look at the race of residents in drawing voting districts. Thomas has long opposed voting districts drawn along racial lines to enhance the political power of blacks and other minorities traditionally kept from the polls.

Financial disclosures

Thomas' silence has drawn curiosity and criticism over the years. (The New York Timesrecently printed an editorial saying it hoped he would break his record and re-enter the give-and-take.) This five-year anniversary comes at a point when some activists have raised concerns about Thomas' off-the-bench behavior.

In response to a complaint from the liberal advocacy group Common Cause, for example, Thomas in January amended years of financial disclosure filings to include the employment of his wife, Virginia. Thomas had failed to report income by his wife, a conservative activist who has backed Tea Party issues and candidates.

Thomas said the information about his wife's salary sources was "inadvertently omitted." He corrected it back two decades.

Virginia Thomas helped found the conservative group Liberty Central in fall 2009 and until December oversaw its operations. Liberty Central, which advocates limited government, supported some Tea Party candidates in the 2010 election cycle. Virginia Thomas earlier had worked for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank.

Virginia Thomas has made headlines recently for her own activities. In October, she left a telephone message seeking an apology from Brandeis University professor Anita Hill, who had accused Thomas of sexual harassment during his Senate confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court.

As he has continued his silence during arguments, Justice Thomas has declined requests for comment about his off-bench activities or those of his wife.