What Precedents Would Clarence Thomas Overturn Next?

The New Yorker Radio Hour

WNYC Studios and The New Yorker

News, David, Books, Arts, Storytelling, Wnyc, New, Remnick, News Commentary, Yorker, Politics

4.2 • 5.5K Ratings

🗓️ 8 July 2022

⏱️ 24 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Justice Clarence Thomas once was an outlier for his legal views. But Thomas is now the heart of the Court’s conservative bloc, and his concurring opinion in the recent abortion ruling calls out some other precedents the Court might overturn. Jeannie Suk Gersen teaches constitutional law at Harvard Law School and clerked for former Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court; she has been covering the end of Roe v. Wade for The New Yorker, and she spoke with David Remnick about Thomas’s concurrence. It articulates a view more extreme than Justice Alito’s majority opinion, saying that other rights derived from privacy—such as contraception and same-sex intimacy—are not constitutional rights at all. “We have to remember he’s been saying it out loud for quite some time,” Suk Gersen says. “This is not a new thing from Justice Thomas. It’s just that we normally—over decades—didn’t pay that much attention to him, because he was alone in his dissents and concurrences.”

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	This is The New Yorker Radio Hour, a co-production of WNWC Studios and The New Yorker.
0:10.2	Welcome to The New Yorker Radio Hour, I'm David Remnik.
0:13.1	The Supreme Court has issued a deluge of big rulings in recent weeks, and it defines
0:18.5	a new epoch in American law.
0:21.1	The majority on the court has dramatically limited the ability of the U.S. government
0:25.3	to issue environmental regulations or to limit gun ownership, and at the same time, they
0:31.0	greatly increase the power of the states to regulate a woman's right to control her own
0:36.0	body.
0:37.3	That decision, the DOBS ruling, ended federally guaranteed abortion rights.
0:42.3	But within the court's majority, there were different opinions on why those rights should
0:46.6	be abolished.
0:48.1	Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority, but he also wrote a separate opinion known
0:52.6	as a concurrence that expresses an even more conservative view of the world and the law.
0:58.7	And Thomas' concurrence foreshadows how this newly ascended conservative block might
1:03.3	reshape American law.
1:05.6	Jeanne Sukgersen teaches constitutional law at Harvard Law School.
1:09.6	She clerk for former Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court, and she's a contributor
1:14.0	to The New Yorker.
1:16.6	Jeanne, you just wrote a comment on the Supreme Court for the magazine, and in that piece,
1:20.9	you say, the year 2022 will go down in history as a turning point when the Supreme Court's
1:27.0	conservative revolution seemed to arrive all at once.
1:31.7	What do you mean by that, by all at once?
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from WNYC Studios and The New Yorker, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of WNYC Studios and The New Yorker and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.