US News Metro Long Island Politics

Sports NFL MLB Olympics NBA NHL College Football College Basketball WNBA

Entertainment TV Movies Music Celebrities Awards Theater

Lifestyle Weird But True Sex & Relationships Viral Trends Human Interest Parenting Fashion & Beauty Food & Drink Travel

Health Wellness Fitness Health Care Medicine Men’s Health Women’s Health Mental Health Nutrition

Science Space Environment Wildlife Archaeology

Today’s Paper Covers Columnists Horoscopes Crosswords & Games Sports Odds Podcasts Careers

Email Newsletters Official Store Home Delivery Tips

Switch between CA and NY editions here.

Clarence Thomas triumphs — and his legal vision, too

See more of our coverage in your search results.

This month, Clarence Thomas became the second-longest-serving justice in Supreme Court history.

That milestone would be notable for any jurist.

For Thomas, it marks something more: the vindication of a constitutional vision that, for decades, was caricatured as eccentric, angry or unserious — until the court, and the country, began catching up.

The occasion comes just as Thomas has again demonstrated why his tenure matters.

In this session’s Louisiana v. Callais, the court held that Louisiana’s race-driven congressional map could not be justified by a misconstrued Voting Rights Act.

As my colleague Dan Morenoff has explained, Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion was correct in tightening Section 2 doctrine so that it no longer forces states into racial sorting.

What Clarence Thomas can teach Hollywood about the real fight for equality

Negotiate to free Iranians, ‘effective leadership’ equals safer streets and other commentary

Supreme Court sides with internet service provider Cox in fight with record labels over pirated music

But Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, concurred to say what he’s said for over 30 years: Section 2 doesn’t regulate districting at all.

That’s Thomas in full — he joins the court when it moves toward the Constitution, but doesn’t trim his sails merely because a plurality of colleagues has stopped short of first principles.

In Callais, he praised the court for ending a “disastrous misadventure” in voting-rights jurisprudence, but added that the statutory text — “voting qualification,” “prerequisite to........

© New York Post