NRO has just posted my review of The Supreme Court Opinions of Justice Clarence Thomas: 1991-2006 – A Conservative’s Perspective by Brooklyn law professor emeritus Henry Mark Holzer. The book is a quick read, and ably summarizes the key elements of Justice Thomas’ jurisprudence. Nonetheless, I was a bit disappointed. I was hoping for greater engagement with and critical analysis of Thomas’ ideas. One can admire Justice Thomas’ doctrinal consistency and commitment to principle, without descending into hagiography. As I conclude the review:
Holzer accurately describes Thomas as a “thoughtful conservative” whose “reputation among laypersons is not commensurate with his achievements.” Justice Thomas has indeed distinguished himself on the Court as an able and articulate explicator of the original meaning of the Constitution. Thomas fans will not doubt enjoy Holzer’s overview and summary of Thomas’s unique contribution to the Court, and its hint at the further contributions that are yet to come. The substance of his distinctively conservative jurisprudence is worthy of more critical treatment and discussion, however. Supreme Court Opinions is a good reference work regarding the justice’s body of work — something like an annotated greatest hits — and should please Justice Thomas’s many fans, but ultimately more work will be needed to earn more converts to his cause.