Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas says elite institutions like Stanford Law School are “presumptively off limits” to conservative figures like him.
Speaking at a Hoover Institution forum on Aug. 11, Thomas claimed such campuses foster hostility.
“That’s the reality,” Thomas said. “That’s the world we’re in, because there’s certain places that are just presumptively off limits. This is the way it works. And that’s true. I mean, I’ve been to Yale Law School, but that’s the way it works. And to say it isn’t is to lie.”
In response, Stanford issued a statement saying, “We would be honored to host Justice Thomas at Stanford Law School … The Stanford Constitutional Law Center, directed by professor Michael McConnell, former judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, regularly hosts members of the judiciary on campus. … Our students and faculty would welcome the opportunity to hear from Justice Thomas and engage with his perspectives on the court, the Constitution and the law.”
However, on March 9, 2023, federal appeals court Judge Kyle Duncan attempted to speak at the law school but was met with fierce backlash from students affiliated with LGBTQ groups.
Initially, two LGBTQ groups demanded that Duncan speak to students via Zoom. When that failed, a group of 90 law students appeared with signs and bullhorns at Duncan’s talk, preventing him from completing his speech.
When Duncan asked for assistance, DEI administrator Tirien Steinbach stood up and acknowledged his free speech rights but sided with the protesters. She claimed his decisions harmed people and asked, “Is the juice worth the squeeze?”
Stanford Dean Jenny Martinez and President Marc Tessier-Lavigne later issued a written apology to Duncan.
This is an obvious statement. In contrast, UC Berkeley would probably approve of erecting a statue of Sonia Sotomayor in front of the law school building.
A friend who is in the HR department where I worked shared with me a list companies maintain of job applicants who won’t get an interview. It’s the “do not hire” list and I’m told it contained all of the Stanford Law graduates this spring. If you’re disruptive of a federal judge speaking to your class, then you won’t have an open mind when you reach the business world. I’m sure these graduates will find jobs working as public defenders or at law clinics for the poor.
I saw the video of the students shouting down that judge, snapping their fingers in synchronization, blasting air horns and refusing to let him speak. I can understand why a normal person wouldn’t want to be represented by kooks like that. Fortunately, with the internet, everyone will know what they did.
Justice Thomas is free to play golf with me at Stanford at anytime, I’ll even cover the green fees, but he has to walk the course. Those are the rules for conservatives.
Cheap shot.
John H. — you say it as if public defenders and law clinics for the poor are a bad thing? I guess no “justice for all” in your world.
James, welcome to the real world where things aren’t always “fair” and you “eat what you kill.”
If the cost of a three-year Stanford Law School education is $375,000, a $60,000 job with a legal aid nonprofit isn’t a good return on your investment. You missed your opportunity at the golden ticket. Last time I checked, first-year associate at Pillsbury in San Francisco makes $225,000. Kirkland & Ellis, DLA Piper and Paul, Weiss pay the same.
Let’s say you took out a 20-year loan at 8% interest to pay for your $375,000 law degree. You’d be paying $3,100 a month or $37,200 a year on that loan. How would you be able to make those payments with a job that pays $60,000 a year?
Oh, another reality check. That $60,000 public defender/legal aid job will only pay $46,000 to $51,000 a year after taxes.
I’ll stop now. I’m sure this is humiliating enough.