Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas didn’t hold back in a dissent released Monday, calling out a circuit court for failing to stick to legal precedent.
Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, criticized the court’s decision not to review a controversial lower court ruling. His main gripe? The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, he argued, repeatedly ignored the law when handling certain criminal cases.
“Because I would not overlook the Sixth Circuit’s blatant and repeated disrespect for the rule of law, I respectfully dissent,” Thomas stated.
Why This Matters
At the heart of Thomas’ dissent is the Sixth Circuit’s application of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). This federal law restricts courts’ power to overturn state criminal convictions.
According to Thomas, the Sixth Circuit has a history of getting AEDPA wrong—so much so that the Supreme Court has stepped in at least two dozen times to fix their errors.
The Case at Hand
This latest clash involves David Smith, an Ohio man convicted in 2015 of a brutal crime spree. Smith was found guilty of attempted murder, felonious assault, aggravated robbery, and burglary after attacking Quortney Tolliver in her home.
Before his trial, Smith argued that the way law enforcement handled Tolliver’s identification of him as the suspect was unfairly suggestive. The court allowed the evidence, and Smith was convicted.
On appeal, Smith renewed his challenge, and the Sixth Circuit sided with him, saying the identification process was highly flawed. They ordered the state to either retry Smith within 180 days or release him.
Justice Thomas wasn’t buying it. He slammed the Sixth Circuit for what he described as “particularly egregious” errors.
Thomas’ Concerns
Thomas argued the lower court’s ruling doesn’t just affect this one case—it sets a dangerous precedent.
“The State of Ohio must retry Smith for a crime committed nearly a decade ago,” Thomas wrote. “That result comes at a steep cost for both society and the victim.”
Thomas believes the Sixth Circuit went beyond its limited role in reviewing state criminal convictions and that their ruling rewards Smith unfairly.
What’s Next?
For now, the Supreme Court’s decision allows Smith to be retried. Ohio has 180 days to either build its case again or let him go.
Quick Legal Notes
- What’s a dissenting opinion?
It’s when a Supreme Court justice writes to explain why they disagree with the majority. While dissents don’t carry the weight of law, they’re significant for expressing alternative viewpoints on complex issues. - How many justices are on the Supreme Court?
The U.S. Supreme Court has nine justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and others.
What People Are Saying
Justice Thomas:
“Smith did not make the required showing for habeas relief, and the Sixth Circuit’s analysis blatantly disregards both AEDPA and this Court’s precedents in order to give Smith a regrettable windfall.”
