Clarence Thomas Dissents on Campaign Finance Disclosure, Cites Anti-Gay Prop 8 Supporters

On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporations can "spend freely" to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress.

As usual, Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's lone black justice, joined the conservative majority. Thomas dissented on Part IV, which upheld disclaimer and disclosure requirements. Curiously, the justice took the opportunity to gay-bash from the bench and cited anti-gay Proposition 8 supporters who wanted their identities hidden.

Thomas' dissent reads in part:

I dissent from Part IV of the Court’s opinion, however, because the Court’s constitutional analysis does not go far enough. The disclosure, disclaimer, and reporting requirements in BCRA §§201 and 311 are also unconstitutional….

Amici’s examples relate principally to Proposition 8, a state ballot proposition that California voters narrowly passed in the 2008 general election. … Any donor who gave more than $100 to any committee supporting or opposing Proposition 8 was required to disclose his full name, street address, occupation, employer’s name (or business name, if self-employed), and the total amount of his contributions. 1 See Cal. Govt. Code Ann. §84211(f) (West 2005). The California Secretary of State was then required to post this information on the Internet.

Some opponents of Proposition 8 compiled this information and created Web sites with maps showing the locations of homes or businesses of Proposition 8 supporters. Many supporters (or their customers) suffered property damage, or threats of physical violence or death, as a result. …

Now more than ever, §§201 and 311 will chill protected speech because—as California voters can attest—”the advent of the Internet” enables “prompt disclosure of expenditures,” which “provide[s]” political opponents “with the information needed” to intimidate and retaliate against their foes. Thus, “disclosure permits citizens … to react to the speech of [their political opponents] in a proper”—or undeniably improper —”way” long before a plaintiff could prevail on an as-applied challenge.

"I cannot endorse a view of the First Amendment that subjects citizens of this Nation to death threats, ruined careers, damaged or defaced property, or pre-emptive and threatening warning letters as the price for engaging in “core political speech, the ‘primary object of First Amendment protection.’"

Adds Joe Sudbay at AMERICABlog: "That's the contribution to the debate from Justice Thomas. He seems a tad obsessed with the gays these days. One wonders if he'd ever compile a similar list of incidents of hate crimes and violence against LGBT Americans."

Comments

[philly]

Hes always been a real sell out.

[Faison]

What an a-hole.
He never has anything to say or contribute and when he does he singles out the gays.smh

[CC]

Uncle Tom is still at his old tricks! Its too bad Anita Hill didn't do him in.

[Baltimore Femme]

thanks a lot, uncle tom
we can always on you to say something mean spirited and to try to tear down any minority.

it's just wrong he would use that example, like gays and trans folk haven't been attacked just on genl principle

so very sad

[Jim]

So let me get this straight. Justice Thomas wants corporations to be able to donate unlimited quantities of money to candidates, but he wants them to be able to do it secretly.

We no longer elect our politicians anymore. So what right do we have to know who actually hired them?

What I find particularly ironic in all of this is that if the Prop 8 case had been reversed—that is, if it had been gay people who were having their contributions publicized—then Justice Thomas would be have taken the opposite position on this matter.

He is not interested in anyone’s privacy or rights. He is only interested in whatever hurts ordinary people the most.

[KevMusic]

What's most important here is the ruling itself. Corporations and special interest groups now have the keys to the kingdom. There will never be healthcare reform, Wall Street reform, or any real work done to offset climate change because now corporations can buy any and every election with no checks nor balances. What little was left of democracy in this country is dead and gone.

I'd advise all minorities, especially of the gay persuasion to start investigating relocation destinations. I've chosen Spain. Universal healthcare and gay marriage. See ya!

[soulbrotha]

Read the TRUTH about Uncle Tom:

http://symonsez.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/you-dont-know-uncle-tom-he-was-the-opposite-of-what-many-americans-think/

You, Mr. Thomas, are NO Uncle Tom!

[jstheater]

The very thought of this man makes me want to retch. He is monstrous, and his jurisprudence is beyond being a joke, given how dangerous it has been since he was installed by George H. W. Bush, with Democratic enablement.

[Derrick from Philly]

I know that Justice Sotomayor is a dignified woman, but I wish that one afternoon while the court is in session she'd have a mental flashback to her Bronx roots and whup Thomas' gray-haired azz.

[Lukas]

Another shining example of an activist judge. He went out of his way, when it's not even remotely necessary, to thump against a minority group. If that is not political activism, I don't know what is. Where are the folks who complained about California's "activist" judges? Oh, that's right, they only object to it if it goes against conservative views.

[DT]

I'm a "to each his/her own" kin dof person but I cannot go without saying I've never seen anyone shuck and jive quite like Thomas...

[Ravenback]

@ soulbrotha

Thank you for your post about Uncle Tom. I hate when people consistently misuse the term to attack someone. If Thomas was an Uncle Tom, he would have pretended to be conservative in order to get on the bench and then he would have become a more liberal justice. As you stated, Clarence Thomas is no Uncle Tom.

[alicia banks]

I HATE THIS MAN!

but do not let sotomayer off the hook either

this is what obama placed her to do

protect corps!

they are all off to a stellar year

shame!!!

http://aliciabanks.vox.com/library/post/kudos-to-supreme-court-justice-sonia-sotomayor.html?_c=feed-atom

[Luther]

I lust LOATHE this mental midget and his hate.

And, the gall to use Prop 8 when the same "conservatives' would ban his marriage to the white chick in a heartbeat of they could as they are disgusted by that as they are gay people.

[Zaidi]

He's a delusional, and self-loathing, Negro who, whenever he's sitting on the high bench, ejaculates black seeds of destruction while vigorously masturbating under his black robe.