Justice Clarence Thomas’ recent speech at the University of Texas has sparked significant debate among legal professionals and scholars. During his remarks, ostensibly marking the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, Justice Thomas made a controversial critique of progressivism, attributing some of the most egregious events of the 20th century to this political movement. His comments have been met with a mix of surprise and criticism, prompting closer examination of the historical context and contributions of progressivism in American society.
Justice Thomas highlighted figures such as Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, suggesting that their tyrannical regimes were intertwined with the rise of progressivism. He also linked progressivism to racial segregation and eugenics, asserting that this ideology sought to replace the foundational principles of the Declaration of Independence. These remarks have raised eyebrows among those familiar with both historical and contemporary definitions of progressive policies.
Although it is important that justices articulate their viewpoints, this public condemnation of progressivism seems to exacerbate the existing political polarization rather than providing common ground. As articulated by legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky in SCOTUSblog’s “Courtly Observations” series, painting progressivism with a broad brush overlooks the significant advancements it has championed, such as racial justice and the extension of civil liberties.
Consider the realm of racial justice, where progressives have been at the forefront of dismantling segregationist policies. Legal victories such as Brown v. Board of Education and Loving v. Virginia were instrumental in challenging racial inequality, all under progressive leadership. Additionally, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, both critical to advancing racial equality, faced fierce opposition but were ultimately embraced due to progressive efforts.
Moreover, the application of the Bill of Rights to state and local governments was a significant step in expanding freedoms, achieved through progressive advocacy and Supreme Court rulings. Cases such as Gitlow v. New York and Gideon v. Wainwright showcase the commitment to ensuring constitutional protections at all government levels.
Freedom of speech has likewise been fortified through progressive victories in landmark cases like New York Times v. Sullivan, which reinforced the First Amendment’s role in protecting robust public debate. Such cases underscore the irony in Justice Thomas’ statements, given his advocacy for limiting the press freedoms that these progressive-influenced decisions have expanded.
Chemerinsky argues that, while not flawless, the history of progressivism has undeniably contributed to substantive social change and advancement of equality, contrary to Justice Thomas’ assertions. Whether progressives or conservatives are correct on all counts is a matter of ongoing debate; however, the achievements associated with progressive actions are an integral part of modern American legal and social landscapes.