Justice Clarence Thomas Marks 12,360 Days on Supreme Court, Championing "Color-Blind" Constitutionalism

Justice Clarence Thomas has reached a significant milestone, serving 12,360 days on the Supreme Court, a tenure that now equals that of the revered Justice John Marshall Harlan. This distinction highlights Justice Thomas's enduring commitment to a "color-blind" interpretation of the Constitution, a philosophy he frequently links to Justice Harlan's historic dissent in the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson case. Justice Harlan's solitary dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson famously declared, "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens." This powerful statement challenged the majority opinion that established the "separate but equal" doctrine, which subsequently legitimized racial segregation for decades. Justice Harlan argued that the Constitution should not permit distinctions based on race in civil rights. Justice Thomas has consistently advocated for this "color-blind" principle throughout his nearly 34 years on the bench, asserting that the government should not make classifications based on race. His judicial philosophy, rooted in originalism, holds that the Fourteenth Amendment forbids all racial discrimination, regardless of its intent, including policies designed to be "beneficial" like affirmative action. He views such policies as inherently discriminatory and a deviation from the Constitution's promise of equality. This judicial stance was prominently featured in his 60-page concurring opinion in the recent Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard case. In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court effectively ended race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Justice Thomas's concurrence provided an extensive originalist defense of the "color-blind" Constitution, arguing that the Court's precedents should have consistently adhered to this principle. > "Only one Member of the Court adhered to the equality principle; Justice Harlan, standing alone in dissent, wrote: 'Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.' Id., at 559." Justice Thomas further asserted that the Students for Fair Admissions decision effectively overruled Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 ruling that had permitted the limited use of race in admissions. He has long contended that affirmative action policies "redistribute individuals among institutions of higher learning" and "stamp [Black and Hispanic students] with a badge of inferiority," undermining individual achievement. His jurisprudence emphasizes individual merit and equal treatment under the law, rather than group-based outcomes. Justice Thomas believes that policies based on racial classifications perpetuate racial consciousness and hinder true equality. His long service and consistent judicial philosophy underscore a profound influence on the Court's current trajectory regarding civil rights and the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.