What to know about Clarence Thomas dissenting opinion in domestic violence gun case
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 чер 2024
- The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 Friday to uphold a federal law that bans gun ownership for those subject to domestic abuse restraining orders. Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter. CBS News legal contributor Jessica Levinson and CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford have more on the decision and Thomas' dissent.
CBS News 24/7 is the premier anchored streaming news service from CBS News and Stations that is available free to everyone with access to the internet and is the destination for breaking news, live events, original reporting and storytelling, and programs from CBS News and Stations' top anchors and correspondents working locally, nationally and around the globe. It is available on more than 30 platforms across mobile, desktop and connected TVs for free, as well as CBSNews.com and Paramount+ and live in 91 countries.
Subscribe to the CBS News UA-cam channel: / cbsnews
Watch CBS News 24/7: cbsnews.com/live/
Download the CBS News app: cbsnews.com/mobile/
Follow CBS News on Instagram: / cbsnews
Like CBS News on Facebook: / cbsnews
Follow CBS News on X: / cbsnews
Subscribe to our newsletters: cbsnews.com/newsletters/
Try Paramount+ free: paramountplus.com/?ftag=PPM-0...
For video licensing inquiries, contact: licensing@veritone.com
Thomas has ruined Supreme Court's reputation. So corrupt, so mean
Him and his fundamentalist, zealous friend need to be replaced
He got it right.
Make domestic violence a felony and this debate takes care of itself.
No it would not. Shall not infringe is set in stone, not clay, just as your freedom of speech and of expression are set in stone not clay. The stone is our Constitution and Bill of Rights. The clay are all the laws local, state and federal governments create to circumvent them. Our Supreme Court is there to correct them when they do. Our Supreme Court failed us this time. It allowed its utter disdain for the man that violated his right to bear arms with his act of violence to sway their decision. They based their decision on clay, not stone.
Only until the protection order is over
Well, one thing you gotta say about thomas is, at least he holds up his end of the bargain to his bribers. trump promised healthcare to his dopes and just hoped they'd forget it.
Restrict guns to use within well regulated militias and this debate takes care of itself.
Under an originalist court Thomas was worth 3/5 of a person & his marriage was illegal. It’s fascinating how he cherry picks his principles. In any event, All constitutional rights have limitations.
I don't think anyone is surprised.
To me and a lot of other Americans, the question we ponder is; how on earth did he even get on the court...!!!???
What happened, we seriously need to get some clarification from the Bush family on this colossal blunder.
It wasn't just the Bush Presidency. The leader in the Senate who put Justice Thomas on the court was Joe Biden.
Hey, blame Senate for approving Thomas.
Thomas is showing himself a bigger clown 🤡 with every decision 👎
He’s the only true patriot!
Oh, okay, last year his nephew (who he raised) was arrested for guns and drug offenses
This could have and will save a lot of lives.
They didn’t go with Thomas’s view.
This frigging guy... I get such a creepy vibe from him.
Thomas is a despicable human being. The Senators at his confirmation hearing should have listened to Anita Hill.
I believed Anita Hill. I was furious that Thomas was approved for Supreme Court. He's proven to be terribly corrupt.
Someone needs to point out to Clarence Thomas that it's unwise to move forward by looking back in order to determine the best route to take.
Indeed. Stop to see if what we did worked well; I’m sure he’d say “yup, I’m super duper happy with the results of my choices in life”
Anyone other than someone who thinks they’re always right and can’t make a mistake would then back at relevant things before moving further forward, adjusting course if we’re headed into a brick wall or off a cliff.
I understand where Justice Thomas is coming from. However, even one of our founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
Justice Thomas needs to learn that the Constitution can be amended through...get this... Amendments for changing times.
That’s just stupid. Doesn’t change the vote numbers on the court.
Towns in the old west had signs forbidding guns in city limits and / or no concealed pistols.
Did Thomas complain when the SCOTUS reinterpreted #2?
I believe it could be Constitutional under US Constitution Fourteenth Admendment Section 1. The Second Admendment are for those that need to defend themselves justfully from someone illegally coming to harm you. Domestic violence order is protection from a violent person that don't care about your life that is a inalienable right in the Declaration of Independence that the US Constitution established the government so they don't need a gun until they use it to reasonably defend themselves and not harm innocent people. I preferably believe in using calming words that others value their life so blood isn't on your hands at all but to each its own cause it depend on the situation that everybody don't care to harm that a gun may be used.
Correction: in a 40 to 43 opinion... Justice Thomas being only 3/5 of a person according to his unique interpretation of the Constitution.
It is insane that the main originalist, Justice Thomas, who seems to back views of law in the past centuries, could never as black man be on the Supreme Court at those times.
If someone must be a victim of gun violence, I hope the victims are at least meaningful to someone with the power, but currently no interest, in establishing gun reform.
“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”
WELL REGULATED MILITIA
@@pennyg156self regulated was the intention. Not governmental regulation as that would be inconsistent with the intent of the 2nd ammendment in the firts place.
@@joshturner4741 josh, who told you that? The original intent was for states to have the ability to quickly raise a militia to protect the state. Read what conservative justice warren burger said.
THOMAS no longer serves the
cause of Justice ; only His own ‼
Disgusting and disgraceful. Corruption at its finest!
I too believe that corruption means “things I disagree with.”
Is his true crime being uppity?
People's attack's on Him are Definitely racially motivated!
Then Thomas has NO morals whatsoever
Thomas surrendered his emancipation for servitude that pays very well with lots of fringe benefits. He said to hell with the rest of us.
If Uncle Ruckus was a real person.
HE COMMITTED TREASON AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY NO LEGISLATION OR RULEMAKER CAN TAKE AWAY YOUR RIGHTS FACT.
Sh177ing our pants is also “history and tradition” but then we stop being infants.
All we want is for dangerous things to be kept out of the hands of dangerous people.
Why hasn't Hunter been charged with treason human trafficking and not paying taxes.
I'm just surprised Chief Punk Alito didn't side with Chief Punk Thomas.
Do we jot have due process in America. Thats what this is about.
The problem with the domestic violence restraining order is that they hand them out all day long as long as a person can go In and convince a judge that they don’t feel safe. They don’t need evidence or anything. Takes the judge about ten minutes to come to his decision. It’s a clown show. Now if actual violence was committed then ok. But that’s not how it is.
That's NOT a problem, dumdum.
That's the very strength of it.
@@tr7938 where is the strength of stripping a man or woman’s constitutional rights if there was not a crime committed?
Clarence “the clown” Thomas. Jenny told Clarence how to vote because she wears the stretch pants in the family.
❤
Lower courts had it. He was the ONLY Supreme Court justice🧍🏿♂️
So his position is that convicted felons should have full gun rights? Convicted armed robbers? Rapists? Child kidnappers? Because that's a restriction that wasn't in the Constitution when it was written.
The only thing Thomas shows us is that we really do have the best government money can buy.
President Biden need to get reelected in November to at the very least ensure that should something happen to Thomas and/or Alito to where they are no longer serving on the Supreme Court over the next 4 yeare Biden can replace them with Liberal Justices instead of Conservative 1s.
That, and the whole “Save democracy” thing.
"something should happen"?
Clarence Thomas Needs to be Removed NOW immediately.
This Man is a Embarrassment to his Job as a Judge on the Highest Court of the Land USA and to His Very Own Black PPL to Embarrassed his Own Nationality coming from a Black Family that has Struggled to Survive...his Kids they need to be so embarrassed about him being a part of them just in My Opinion it is so Sad 😢😭...
Of course Thomas didn't vote for it/ He doesn't belong in the Supreme Court/ he and others should also re examine their motives for their disastrous rulings!
Chief Punk Thomas needs to be removed IMMEDIATELY!
Corrupted justice system
Based.
HIS SIDE MONEY 💰. NRA. LOL
Biden needs to ask for Thomases resignation or face termination..wtf is wrong with u ppl..
The problem with the domestic violence restraining order is that they hand them out all day long as long as a person can go In and convince a judge that they don’t feel safe. They don’t need evidence or anything. Takes the judge about ten minutes to come to his decision. It’s a clown show. Now if actual violence was committed then ok. But that’s not how it is.
I find it hard to believe that you don't need any evidence to file a domestic violence complaint. I don't have first hand knowledge so I wouldn't know personally.
False. Protective Orders are not just summarily handed out. All overseen by court.
@@melissabruhn1429 you are in fact wrong. At least In Florida.
You have to be convicted of domestic violence to lose your gun rights not just accused