It's not right he's not in there. Actually very disappointing.

(10-18-2016 09:42 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:Thomas in the 12 years between 1991 and 2002, had written 21 important opinions. Contemporary Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote 13 in 10 years.

And Scalia wrote 52 in 26 years.

Scalia was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986, so by 2002 he had been on the Court for 16 years not 26.

Thanks for catching my math error. Just makes my point about Scalia that much more impressive.

(10-18-2016 09:42 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 01:15 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Cornell School of Law has a site where they list the "important" opinions written from the beginning of the Supreme Court until 2002. (I don't know why they stopped at 2002.)

If you check the list, you'll find that Thurgood Marshall, in his 24 years, wrote one important opinion. That's a "1". Uno. Ein.

Thurgood Marshall ought to be one of the most famous Americans of all time, based on his legal work for the NAACP from 1934-1960. That work was morally significant, required enormous stamina/courage, endangered his life on many occasions, and was performed for very little money or material gain.

Unfortunately (IMHO) the historic fame rightly belonging to Marshall has largely gone to other people (esp. Martin King). And the extent to which Marshall is remembered, is largely based on his years (1967-1991) as a Supreme Court justice, by which point his formidable powers of mind/body were in rapid decline. Numerous accounts by politically-sympathetic observers attest that he just sort of sat there and did nothing (or almost nothing) except to vote in favor of Brennan's position.

Quote:Thomas in the 12 years between 1991 and 2002, had written 21 important opinions. Contemporary Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote 13 in 10 years.

And Scalia wrote 52 in 26 years.

Scalia was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986, so by 2002 he had been on the Court for 16 years not 26.

Other than following Brennan around Marshal was no force on the court.

His work prior to the Court consisted largely of managing far more effective lawyers than himself, something he spoke quite openly about and something Fred Gray spoke extensively about.

(10-18-2016 01:15 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 10:50 AM)ken d Wrote:  I don't think the Smithsonian ignored Thomas' accomplishments. They just couldn't find any.

Thanks. I was hoping some troll would post something like this.

Now the hardly conservative Cornell School of Law has a site where they list the "important" opinions written from the beginning of the Supreme Court until 2002. (I don't know why they stopped at 2002.)

If you check the list, you'll find that Thurgood Marshall, in his 24 years, wrote one important opinion. That's a "1". Uno. Ein.

Thomas in the 12 years between 1991 and 2002, had written 21 important opinions. Contemporary Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote 13 in 10 years.

And Scalia wrote 52 in 26 years.

Link to Cornell Law School

I don't know that they identify these as "important" decisions. The fact is, that according to the link you provided, Thomas wrote a total of three Opinions of the Court. The first ruled that a fine imposed on a US citizen for taking too much money out of the country was excessive. Not exactly groundbreaking jurisprudence. A second upheld the right of a school district to test students involved in competitive extracurricular activities (like sports) for drugs. I couldn't find anything about the third case.

You seem to like to use the word troll a lot. The fact is that this thread, like 95% of the threads in the spin room, are trolling. That seems to be the purpose of the forum. So you just keep on trolling.