NYT Casts Justice Thomas as the Angry Black Man for Real World: Supreme Court

You really need to read the whole piece to appreciate the obnoxious, one-sided attack on Thomas, but I'll share some of my favorites. [emphasis mine]

In the last 100 Supreme Court arguments, Clarence Thomas has not uttered a word. Court watchers have suggested a variety of explanations. Among the least flattering: he is afraid that if he speaks he will reveal his ignorance about the case; he is so ideologically driven that he invariably comes with his mind made up; or he has contempt for the process.

[...]

The court heard arguments this term challenging Louisville’s and Seattle’s voluntary efforts to integrate their schools. The court has long upheld voluntary attempts to bring students of different backgrounds together, including, just a few years ago, the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program. But this time, it is expected to strike down Seattle’s and Louisville’s, which is likely to make public schools much more segregated. With its new members, the court is also likely to make prisons less civilized, and workplaces, elections and criminal trials less fair

Again, read the whole thing; try and figure out exactly what the editorial process is like at the Times that allows a hit-job like this to be published.

If you care to know what Thomas actually thinks, read his dissent in the Raich case here, and a post-Raich NRO article by Randy Barnett here.