By: George Hiskler

As a general perception, the Supreme Court is supposed to be an institution of impartiality, judicial fortitude, and constituted by men and women who have sacrificed their private interest for the purpose of democratic continuity—or republic continuity, whichever one you’d prefer. For the most part it is. But the principles and foundations of the High Court is beginning to see failure. In part because of Clarence Thomas, the George H.W. Bush (Bush Senior, for those who can’t follow the abbreviations) nominated justice. For the past five years, Thomas hasn’t said a thing in any of the case hearings each term. What does that mean? Well, to express the rarity of such an incidence, I’ll just state that it’s never happened before. In the 235 years of this country and 112 justices that have served, not one, safe Thomas, has gone so long in reticence.

It’s absolutely irresponsible for a High Court Justice. To the letter of the law, though, it’s not entirely illegal, but it kind of spits on the law if you really think about it. But this isn’t his biggest flaw as a justice. It gets worse, much worse.

In summarization (for those always on the go) Justice Clarence Thomas has effectively politicized the Supreme Court, an institution that was supposed to be beyond such politicking and corruption. The Founding Fathers intended for all three branches—legislative, executive, and judicial—to be entirely impartial, disinterested parties that had no hand in private, economical interests. That was their big thing! And, as history has shown, the legislative and executive branches aren’t necessarily that easy to refrain from politicking. But the judicial branch was supposed to be the one exception.

Now, to get into the specifics to back up some of the claims that I’ve been making. For one, his wife made $700,000 from exploiting a right-wing welfare system, made up of think-tank stipends and Tea Party activism (a pathetic example of the rich getting richer)—she didn’t need the money, since Thomas was making six figures already for essentially doing nothing, but it’s not like she’s going to turn it down. Then, when filling out government disclosure forms, Thomas lied by putting $0 where $700,000 was supposed to go in spousal income, thus bypassing those pesky taxes.

Furthering his insult on the American people, Thomas continued his corrupt career as High Justice by going ahead and getting in bed with the Koch Brothers, the well-greased “sugar daddies to the Tea Party.” After returning from a retreat with these corporate barons, Thomas helped in overturning a law that had previously not allowed corporations to “sell democracy,” according to pundits. His decisions have effectively led to the admission of corporate electioneering in this upcoming decade—a fundamental shift in the way politics have been conducted for the past two-hundred plus years (at least in America, for the most part).

When corporations are allowed to promote a candidate, ideologies, certain political systems, then the system is lost. The Supreme Court is lost, as well. But their judgments to make robber barons like the Koch’s will be the ultimate tragedy to the Constitution and to the State. Of course, the justices involved were able to give sufficient reason as to why they overturned such a precedent, but, again, it’s not necessarily keeping the faith to the spirit of the law. While we’ve never been a nation to adhere to other people’s traditions, basically forging our own path, the state of politics has never quite been so far down corporate pockets as it is today. The free market and government were never intended to be so interchangeable. There is and should always be a distinction between the two. But it is people like Justice Clarence Thomas that have ruined any remnant of democracy that was left.

Not since Samuel Chase has there been as much talk of impeaching a Supreme Court justice, but I believe we’ve reached that point. Or Thomas has forced us to that point. I believe that it is our duty as American citizens to voice our opinions, to rise up against political tyrants, such as Thomas. As Cliff Schecter put it, “Thomas has shown no moral compass, judicial ethics, intellectual rigor and understanding of his duties.” And while the power of impeachment should never turn into a mobocracy, it should be a well-calculated tool in effectively correcting a wrong. Many lawyers who worked with Thomas before he was elected to High Justice never expected him to reach such esteem. It baffled them, due to Thomas’ past, which has been nothing more than the dismissal of justice for his own political gain and ideologies. It is time that we correct such wrongs of the past through the means that are provided: Impeach!