Clarence Thomas Decries Supreme Court Intervention
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decried the Supreme Court's involvement in a death row case in his dissent from the case on Thursday.
The court determined that Texas death row inmate Ruben Gutierrez has a right to sue a local district attorney with a civil rights complaint for failing to do a DNA test at the scene of the murder for which he was convicted, but insists he did not commit.
Dissenting against the court's majority opinion, Thomas said, "Intervention serves no purpose other than to exacerbate the already egregious delays endemic to capital litigation," and said the court did not stick to the original interpretation of the Due Process clause to come to this conclusion.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is seen before swearing in Pam Bondi as attorney general in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 5, 2025.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is seen before swearing in Pam Bondi as attorney general in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 5, 2025.
Francis Chung/POLITICO via AP Images
Why It Matters
Several cases on the Due Process clause are in the courts right now based on the Trump administration's assertions that undocumented migrants do not have the right to due process, and will likely end up in front of the Supreme Court.
If Justice Thomas does not see having access to DNA testing in a trial as a part of due process, he may also side with the Trump administration's limited interpretation of the clause.
What To Know
Gutierrez was found guilty in 1999 of the murder of 85-year-old Escolastica Harrison. He confessed he had been planning on robbing her house, but insists to this day he did not kill her, and that DNA evidence will show he was not at the scene of the crime.
His lawyers successfully argued to the court that he could sue District Attorney Luis Saenz. This is due to Texas's Article 64, which says that convicts are allowed to request DNA samples if they can establish they "would not have been convicted if exculpatory results had been obtained through DNA testing."
This undated photo provided by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice shows inmate Ruben Gutierrez.
This undated photo provided by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice shows inmate Ruben Gutierrez.
Texas Department of Criminal Justice via AP
The case was brought to the Supreme Court, as Gutierrez's lawyers said he had been denied federal civil rights by being denied the right to sue under Texas's Article 64.
However, Justice Thomas disagreed. In his dissent, Thomas said, "The Fourteenth Amendment does not protect Gutierrez's asserted 'liberty interest.' As originally understood, 'liberty' in the Fourteenth Amendment likely referred only to freedom from physical restraint. It did not include entitlements to government-created benefits."
He said that this ruling creates a "tool for obstruction," which is getting in the way of Gutierrez's sentence, and slowing down capital punishment in the state of Texas, adding, "There is every reason to think that the ultimate claim of actual innocence on which Gutierrez's case rests is baseless."
Thomas is referred to as a textualist, and often rules based on interpretations of the Constitution as of when it was written, lending to more conservative rulings.
What People Are Saying
Justice Clarence Thomas in his dissent: "The Due Process Clause protects an individual's natural liberty from government interference. It does not guarantee entitlements to government benefits like Texas's voluntarily adopted post-conviction procedures. By intervening to revive this suit, the Court facilitates precisely the 'unjustified delay' that it is supposed to prevent in capital cases."
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her ruling in favor of Gutierrez: "Gutierrez has standing to challenge Texas's DNA testing procedures under the Due Process Clause."
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court is set to rule on several landmark cases on June 27, but these cases do not involve the Trump administration's interpretation of due process. These cases will arrive at the Supreme Court either later in 2025 or in 2026.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
$7K worth of Labubu dolls stolen from Los Angeles store, authorities say
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A group of masked thieves stole about $7,000 worth of Labubu dolls from a Los Angeles-area store this week, authorities said. The incident took place early Wednesday morning at a store in La Puente, a city about 18 miles (29 kilometers) east of Los Angeles, the LA County Sheriff's Department said. The department said the suspects used a stolen Toyota Tacoma in the incident, which was recovered shortly afterward. The agency said it was investigating the case and did not have additional information. Labubu dolls, created by Hong Kong-born artist Kasing Lung, have become a popular collectible item a decade after the toothy monsters were first introduced. Toy vendor One Stop Shop said in an Instagram post that the thieves took all of the store's inventory and trashed the establishment. The store posted surveillance footage showing a group of people wearing hoodies and face coverings breaking in. The suspects are seen shuffling through items and carrying boxes out of the shop. 'We are still in shock,' the store said in its post, urging people to help find the thieves.
San Francisco Chronicle
4 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Iraqi prime minister removes paramilitary commanders after deadly clash with police
BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq's prime minister approved sweeping disciplinary and legal measures against senior commanders in a paramilitary force after clashes with police at a government facility that left three people dead last month, his office said Saturday. Gunmen descended on the agricultural directorate in Baghdad's Karkh district on July 27 and clashed with federal police. The raid came after the former head of the directorate was ousted and a new one appointed. A government-commissioned investigation found that the former director — who was implicated in corruption cases — had called in members of the Kataib Hezbollah militia to stage the attack, Sabah Al-Numan, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, said in a statement Saturday. Al-Sudani, who also serves as commander in chief of the armed forces, ordered the formation of a committee to investigate the attack. Kataib Hezbollah is part of the Popular Mobilization Forces, a coalition of mostly Shiite, Iran-backed militias that formed to fight the Islamic State extremist group as it rampaged across the country more than a decade ago. The PMF was formally placed under the control of the Iraqi military in 2016, but in practice it still operates with significant autonomy. Some groups within the coalition have periodically launched drone attacks on bases housing U.S. troops in Syria. The Kataib Hezbollah fighters who staged the attack in Karkh were affiliated with the 45th and 46th Brigades of the PMF, the government statement said. Al-Sudani approved recommendations to remove the commanders of those two brigades, refer all those involved in the raid to the judiciary, and open an investigation into 'negligence in leadership and control duties' in the PMF command, it said. The report also cited structural failings within the PMF, noting the presence of formations that act outside the chain of command. The relationship between the Iraqi state and the PMF has been a point of tension with the United States as Iraq attempts to balance its relations with Washington and Tehran. The Iraqi parliament is discussing legislation that would solidify the relationship between the military and the PMF, drawing objections from Washington, which considers some of the armed groups in the coalition, including Kataib Hezbollah, to be terrorist organizations. In an interview with The Associated Press last month, Al-Sudani defended the proposed legislation, saying it's part of an effort to ensure that arms are controlled by the state. 'Security agencies must operate under laws and be subject to them and be held accountable,' he said.
San Francisco Chronicle
4 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Hundreds cheer Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego as Democrats take offensive against Trump's tax bill
DAVENPORT, Iowa (AP) — Hundreds of people cheered Sen. Ruben Gallego at a town hall meeting in eastern Iowa Saturday as the first-term Arizona Democrat assailed the massive, Republican-backed tax bill signed by President Donald Trump as likely to make 'America poorer and sicker.' Gallego's upbeat event struck the opposite tone from Rep. Mike Flood's town hall meeting earlier in the week, when an even bigger crowd jeered the Nebraska Republican for most of a 90-minute event in his state to promote the bill. Democrats, searching for months after last year's election defeat for footing in opposing the aggressive tone struck by Trump in his second term in the White House, have gone on the offensive this month, still united in their frustration with Trump but suddenly energized in full-throated opposition to his signature legislation. 'I think this bill is helping Democrats see clearly what's at stake with the future of protections for so many regular Americans,' said Pete Wernimont of Waterloo, who drove 140 miles (225 kilometers) to see Gallego. 'I just hope they are there when it really matters a year from now.' While some Republicans in safe Republican districts are braving crowds to sell Trump's law, most in Congress are heeding GOP leaders' suggestion to keep lower public profiles, especially noteworthy during the August recess following closely on Trump's signing of the tax cut and spending reduction bill last month. Democratic activists are rallying to point out what they see as the measure's political liabilities for Republicans trying to hold their narrow majorities in Congress in next year's midterm elections. 'This is the galvanizing moment that's happening because Democrats now understand, we're the people that fight for the middle class and the working class of America,' Gallego told reporters before the event Saturday. 'This is a clarifying moment for us.' For two hours, the audience of some 300 people applauded and at times stood cheering for the Arizona Democrat, one of several party figures who have been attacking the bill in congressional districts represented by Republicans. He was in Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks' 1st Congressional District, among the most competitive in the nation in the past three congressional elections. For a party frustrated with an array of Trump administration initiatives, the measure has had its own energizing effect. "I came here because I work in health care and this bill will hurt health care,' said Alexandra Salter, a physicians assistant from Davenport. 'I think we are getting more vocal about it, because we need to speak up.' The meeting contrasted sharply with Flood's meeting in Lincoln, Nebraska, on Monday, when an even larger crowd of 700 voiced vigorous opposition to the bill, locking in especially on its changes to Medicaid, the federally funded health care program for low-income American. The bill, which passed with no Democratic votes in the House or Senate, makes substantial cuts to the health care program, notably by imposing work requirements for many of those receiving aid. The same frustration that drew Wernimont to Davenport Saturday convinced Ann Ashburn of Aurora, Nebraska, to drive the 70 miles (113 kilometers) to Lincoln to face Flood on Monday. Ashburn learned about Flood's appearance through an Omaha-area Democratic group called Blue Dot and reached out to friends who joined her. She dismissed any suggestion that such opposition had been orchestrated. 'I think the momentum could have been much greater had we been better organized,' the 72-year-old retired executive said. For now, Republicans have their work cut out for them if they hope to use the measure as a reason for voters to return them to the majority in the 2026 elections. About two-thirds of U.S. adults expect the new law will help the rich, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Most — about 6 in 10 — also think it will do more to hurt than help low-income people, according to the survey taken last. Gallego used his trip to Iowa, which included a requisite stop at the Iowa State Fair, to burnish his own profile in a state that, until 2020, traditionally had hosted the first event in the Democrats' presidential nominating process. Iowa Democrats hope to return to the front of the parade when the 2028 primaries and caucuses begin. Other figures already popular nationally with Democrats such as New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have been making stops in Republican districts decrying the legislation. Ocasio-Cortez last month headlined an event in New York's 21st District, represented by Republican Elise Stefanik, noting among other items its Medicaid provisions. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is scheduled to hold rallies Sunday in Republican-held House districts in North Carolina. He too planned to focus on Medicaid cuts, and note their impact on rural hospitals in the state where former Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat now running for U.S. Senate, worked with the GOP-controlled legislature to expand Medicaid coverage in 2023.
