{"id":134296,"date":"2025-10-02T15:29:09","date_gmt":"2025-10-02T23:29:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/10\/02\/justice-that-said-abortion-is-unconstitutional-fails-to-carry-semester-to-term\/"},"modified":"2025-10-02T15:29:09","modified_gmt":"2025-10-02T23:29:09","slug":"justice-that-said-abortion-is-unconstitutional-fails-to-carry-semester-to-term","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/10\/02\/justice-that-said-abortion-is-unconstitutional-fails-to-carry-semester-to-term\/","title":{"rendered":"Justice That Said Abortion Is Unconstitutional Fails To Carry Semester To Term"},"content":{"rendered":"

Prepare the world\u2019s tiniest violin, my friends. At a recent Catholic University Law School event, while sharing his thoughts on life, the universe, and everything with his former clerk Jenn Mascott (currently nominated to the Third Circuit despite a complete lack of connections to the state of Delaware<\/a>), Justice Clarence Thomas explained that he put the brakes on his George Washington Law teaching gig<\/a> after Dobbs because of \u201cunpleasantness.\u201d<\/p>\n

Oh no! The horror. Unpleasantness, you say?<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

What an absolute snowflake.<\/p>\n

He didn\u2019t want to keep teaching a class\u2026 where he had all the power, controlled the syllabus, the grading, and the air conditioning. A class populated by students who, almost certainly, skewed mostly his way (who else is taking a Thomas class?). Come on, man! I know you prefer hanging out with fawning admirers willing to pay for your luxury vacations<\/a>, but if you\u2019re going to do this job, you\u2019ve got to be able to handle a couple side-eyes in a seminar room.<\/p>\n

You know what\u2019s unpleasant? People having forced births because a witchhunter from the 1600s<\/a> said so. It\u2019s the same thing with Amy Coney Barrett\u2019s recent lament<\/a> that her family forced her to make some coherent legal justification for her superlegislature cosplay to overturn longstanding Constitutional rights. Sorry gang, you don\u2019t get to run away because someone points out that your \u201cdeeply rooted in history and tradition\u201d arguments are about as historical as the History Channel. And even Ancient Aliens<\/em> is better sourced than these Second Amendment opinions<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Honestly, the Ancient Aliens<\/em> comparison is more apropos than it might seem at first blush. You know how every episode involves the same rotating panel of talking heads whether they\u2019re explaining how Egyptians and Mesoamericans couldn\u2019t possibly have independently come up with the idea for a pyramid despite being the most intuitive design imaginable or how angels look like astronauts? That\u2019s because the conspiracy theory world is a big circle jerk of pseudo-academics. Now, for a fun experiment, check out the \u201chistory\u201d the conservative legal movement cites in their opinions. Notice how it\u2019s mostly secondary law review articles published by former clerks turned academics slapping together shoddy, cherry-picked research to paper up the thesis that the Fourteenth Amendment was a scrivener\u2019s error? Idea laundering in action, all to prevent the judges from having to stand behind the history directly\u2026 it\u2019s been vetted (by 3L law review editors, anyway)!<\/p>\n

But that\u2019s the thing. These people are just too chickenshit to stand behind their principles in the face of vague disdain. During the civil rights era, judges faced actual terroristic threats \u2014 the Chief Justice highlighted this in his annual report, before comparing those threats to being criticized by law bloggers<\/a> \u2014 but stood by their decisions. That\u2019s not where this movement is. They\u2019ve got two modes: shocked pearl-clutching that anyone would be so impolitic to question their delicate genius and active troll<\/a>. And both flavors rest on the cloistered, unaccountable perch they\u2019ve fashioned for themselves to enact policy from the bench well beyond anything imagined by the Framers. The throughline of the conservative legal movement is taking reckless, unaccountable fiat and equating it with jurisprudential bravery.<\/p>\n

If it\u2019s unpleasant to hear a few students question your historical fan fiction, maybe don\u2019t reshape the lives of millions based on it.<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: Clarence Thomas Quits Law School Class, Depriving Students Of BOTH Sides Of The \u2018Do Gay People Have Human Rights?\u2019 Debate<\/a>
Amy Coney Barrett\u2019s Fetish For Phony Reluctance<\/a>
Chief Justice John Roberts Thinks You\u2019re Stupid And He\u2019s Probably Right<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search<\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Justice That Said Abortion Is Unconstitutional Fails To Carry Semester To Term<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Photo by Drew Angerer\/Getty Images)\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Prepare the world\u2019s tiniest violin, my friends. At a recent Catholic University Law School event, while sharing his thoughts on life, the universe, and everything with his former clerk Jenn Mascott (currently nominated to the Third Circuit despite a complete lack of connections to the state of Delaware<\/a>), Justice Clarence Thomas explained that he put the brakes on his George Washington Law teaching gig<\/a> after Dobbs because of \u201cunpleasantness.\u201d<\/p>\n

Oh no! The horror. Unpleasantness, you say?<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

What an absolute snowflake.<\/p>\n

He didn\u2019t want to keep teaching a class\u2026 where he had all the power, controlled the syllabus, the grading, and the air conditioning. A class populated by students who, almost certainly, skewed mostly his way (who else is taking a Thomas class?). Come on, man! I know you prefer hanging out with fawning admirers willing to pay for your luxury vacations<\/a>, but if you\u2019re going to do this job, you\u2019ve got to be able to handle a couple side-eyes in a seminar room.<\/p>\n

You know what\u2019s unpleasant? People having forced births because a witchhunter from the 1600s<\/a> said so. It\u2019s the same thing with Amy Coney Barrett\u2019s recent lament<\/a> that her family forced her to make some coherent legal justification for her superlegislature cosplay to overturn longstanding Constitutional rights. Sorry gang, you don\u2019t get to run away because someone points out that your \u201cdeeply rooted in history and tradition\u201d arguments are about as historical as the History Channel. And even Ancient Aliens<\/em> is better sourced than these Second Amendment opinions<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Honestly, the Ancient Aliens<\/em> comparison is more apropos than it might seem at first blush. You know how every episode involves the same rotating panel of talking heads whether they\u2019re explaining how Egyptians and Mesoamericans couldn\u2019t possibly have independently come up with the idea for a pyramid despite being the most intuitive design imaginable or how angels look like astronauts? That\u2019s because the conspiracy theory world is a big circle jerk of pseudo-academics. Now, for a fun experiment, check out the \u201chistory\u201d the conservative legal movement cites in their opinions. Notice how it\u2019s mostly secondary law review articles published by former clerks turned academics slapping together shoddy, cherry-picked research to paper up the thesis that the Fourteenth Amendment was a scrivener\u2019s error? Idea laundering in action, all to prevent the judges from having to stand behind the history directly\u2026 it\u2019s been vetted (by 3L law review editors, anyway)!<\/p>\n

But that\u2019s the thing. These people are just too chickenshit to stand behind their principles in the face of vague disdain. During the civil rights era, judges faced actual terroristic threats \u2014 the Chief Justice highlighted this in his annual report, before comparing those threats to being criticized by law bloggers<\/a> \u2014 but stood by their decisions. That\u2019s not where this movement is. They\u2019ve got two modes: shocked pearl-clutching that anyone would be so impolitic to question their delicate genius and active troll<\/a>. And both flavors rest on the cloistered, unaccountable perch they\u2019ve fashioned for themselves to enact policy from the bench well beyond anything imagined by the Framers. The throughline of the conservative legal movement is taking reckless, unaccountable fiat and equating it with jurisprudential bravery.<\/p>\n

If it\u2019s unpleasant to hear a few students question your historical fan fiction, maybe don\u2019t reshape the lives of millions based on it.<\/p>\n