Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Landmark Skrmetti Case, Justice Thomas Demolishes The ‘Expert Class’
The Federalist ^ | June 18, 2025 | Shawn Fleetwood

Posted on 06/18/2025 4:13:23 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

Associate Justice Clarence Thomas has never been shy about telling it like it is in his Supreme Court opinions. So, it came as little surprise when he demolished the so-called “expert class” in the high court’s Wednesday opinion in U.S. v. Skrmetti.

In a 6-3 ruling, SCOTUS deemed a Tennessee law prohibiting the surgical and chemical castration of minors does not violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. The decision came along ideological lines, with all six Republican appointees voting in the affirmative and all three Democrat appointees dissenting.

While signing onto Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion in the case, Thomas also authored a separate concurring opinion “to address some additional arguments made in defense of Tennessee’s law.” It was here that the Court’s most senior justice shattered attempts by plaintiffs — which included the Biden administration — to “accord outsized credit to claims about medical consensus and expertise.”

Thomas noted that the Biden administration “asserted that ‘the medical community and the nation’s leading hospitals overwhelmingly agree’ with the Government’s position that the treatments outlawed by SB1 can be medically necessary,” with the implication being “that courts should defer to so-called expert consensus.” However, the George H.W. Bush appointee argued, “There are several problems with appealing and deferring to the authority of the expert class.”

First, so-called experts have no license to countermand the ‘wisdom, fairness, or logic of legislative choices.’ … Second, contrary to the representations of the United States and the private plaintiffs, there is no medical consensus on how best to treat gender dysphoria in children,” Thomas wrote. “Third, notwithstanding the alleged experts’ view that young children can provide informed consent to irreversible sex-transition treatments, whether such consent is possible is a question...”

(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: agreatamerican; experts; justicethomas; noexperts; scotus; shouldbechiefjustice

1 posted on 06/18/2025 4:13:23 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Great news…….thanks


2 posted on 06/18/2025 4:21:44 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Great post! Thank you.


3 posted on 06/18/2025 4:30:07 PM PDT by roho (SemperFi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Thomas is the best on the court.

Thomas wrote. “Third, notwithstanding the alleged experts’ view that young children can provide informed consent to irreversible sex-transition treatments, whether such consent is possible is a question of medical ethics that States must decide for themselves. Fourth, there are particularly good reasons to question the expert class here, as recent revelations suggest that leading voices in this area have relied on questionable evidence, and have allowed ideology to influence their medical guidance.”

“Taken together,” the senior justice wrote, “this case serves as a useful reminder that the American people and their representatives are entitled to disagree with those who hold themselves out as experts, and that courts may not ‘sit as a super-legislature to weigh the wisdom of legislation.'”

4 posted on 06/18/2025 4:31:28 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

The reality is that the ‘expert’ class is often too biased and saddled with conflict of interest to be able to be taken seriously as independent purveyors of relevant information.


5 posted on 06/18/2025 4:37:15 PM PDT by neverevergiveup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
"First, so-called experts have no license to countermand the ‘wisdom, fairness, or logic of legislative choices."

He could have stopped right there. The elected representatives of the people are entitled to make stupid laws, or laws that seemingly go against the best interests of the country and the population. It is not the role of courts to second-guess the wisdom of legislative enactments.

End of story.

6 posted on 06/18/2025 4:37:52 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

At one time experts claimed black people were inferior and therefore deserved to be enslaved.

At one time medical experts treated many symptoms by bleeding the patient with leeches in order to keep the humors in the body balanced.

Based on the claims of climate change experts, Glacier National Park erected signs throughout the park claiming the all of the park’s glaciers would disappear by 2020.

At one time mental illness was treated by surgically removing sections of the brain.

The United States invaded Iraq in 2003 based on the assertion of intelligence experts Iraq had developed weapons of mass destruction.

At one time medical experts appeared in advertising proclaiming the health benefits of smoking.

At one time medical experts used mercury to treat syphillis.

In the 1870’s the experts at Western Union declined to purchase Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone patents because it was a “toy” and in their expert opinion the telegraph would continue to dominate communication.

At one time government medical experts approved and conducted medical experiments in which black men were infected with syphillis without their consent or knowledge.

In the 1970’s computer experts insisted there was no reason anyone would want a computer in their homes

Prior to its first voyage maritime experts claimed the passenger ship the Titanic was unsinkable.

In the 1890’s the most prominent physicists claimed heavier than air flying machines were impossible.

In recent years medical experts insist Covid 19 was spread by unvaccinated people and the vaccine was 100% safe.

At one time experts insisted the earth was flat.

Experts throughout history have frequently been wrong.


7 posted on 06/18/2025 4:49:01 PM PDT by Soul of the South (The past is gone and cannot be changed. Tomorrow can be a better day if we work on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Our wonderful Justice Thomas has outdone himself. He is possibly better than Scalia at defending our Constitutional order. May God bless him and make him Chief Justice—soon.


8 posted on 06/18/2025 5:11:08 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (Think about it: The Supreme Court is nine lawyers appointed for life by politicians. —David Horowitz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

And notice, the “experts” are almost always self-appointed, and available for a price.


9 posted on 06/18/2025 5:11:18 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard ( Resist the narrative. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South
At one time government medical experts approved and conducted medical experiments in which black men were infected with syphillis without their consent or knowledge.

No arguing with the overall thrust of your post (the “experts” can and often are wrong) but your point above is not entirely accurate from what I know.

The government did not infect those men with syphilis. They already had it. The government simply identified them, put them in a study group, followed them for years, but did not treat them for the disease. At that point, we don't know if treatments would have worked… syphilis reaches a point where it can't be treated, but they should have tried. That is very different than giving them the disease. Reprehensible yes, but not what you indicated.

10 posted on 06/18/2025 5:38:52 PM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

“Prior to its first voyage maritime experts claimed the passenger ship the Titanic was unsinkable.”

One time the experts were actually RIGHT was when they said that the stupid sub going to the Titanic was a piece of crap.

(I figure someone here has to defend ‘experts’)


11 posted on 06/18/2025 6:42:55 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CFW
"“This case serves as a useful reminder that the American people and their representatives are entitled to disagree with those who hold themselves out as experts, and that courts may not ‘sit as a super-legislature to weigh the wisdom of legislation.'”

Awesome smack to lower judges stepping out of their lanes and Roberts for standing aside while they try.

StillTheMan

12 posted on 06/18/2025 8:24:46 PM PDT by MikelTackNailer (There's a lesson there if I were smart enough to learn it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

Nice broad list - off the top of your head?


13 posted on 06/18/2025 8:37:01 PM PDT by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Bravo, Mr. Justice Thomas. One of the greatest Justices ever!


14 posted on 06/18/2025 10:25:55 PM PDT by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tunehead54

“Nice broad list - off the top of your head?”

Yes


15 posted on 06/19/2025 9:31:11 AM PDT by Soul of the South (The past is gone and cannot be changed. Tomorrow can be a better day if we work on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson