Here’s the Above The Law take on his decision
When thousands signed a petition calling on George Washington University Law School to terminate its relationship with Clarence Thomas, the school remained defiant. GW Law explained that it couldn’t end its ties with Justice Thomas “Because we steadfastly support the robust exchange of ideas and deliberation,” which was a curious way to write because we’re not a T14 school but if you squint real hard we look like one because we throw a few bucks at a Supreme Court justice to teach a seminar.
Alas, Justice Thomas could read the handwriting on the wall — a reference to the most recent instance of textual interpretation Thomas recognizes — and he’s now unavailable to teach the ironically themed “Constitutional Law” seminar he usually offers.
What a blow for law students hoping to hear which 16th century pamphleteers to select when reverse engineering an opinion to meet the political strategy of the contemporary Republican Party! So many screeds from Goody Hamperswithinfield will now go tragically unread when they might very well have described the Framers’ thoughts on whether comely lasses using contraception must be stoned in the town square before or after the next full moon.
Which all goes to GW’s disgraceful effort to wrap itself in the rhetoric of warmed over academic freedom. There’s nothing about Clarence Thomas that speaks to “the robust exchange of ideas and deliberation.” His jurisprudence is a hodgepodge of inconsistencies unified by a results-oriented approach. That’s the exact opposite of deliberation. GW’s better off going with its own Justice Roboto.
Read more at
