Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas sparks outrage for saying he used to be a Prince fan ‘in the ‘80s’
People were not happy that the justice seemed to have “turned his back on Prince.”
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Justice Clarence Thomas sparked social media outrage after saying he used to be a Prince fan.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court considered if artist Andy Warhol violated the federal Copyright Act by painting a portrait of the late musician based on the work of a well-known photographer.
The justices will have to rule on if Mr Warhol’s changes to the photo created something new and different, The New York Times reported.
“The district judge should not assume the role of art critic and seek to ascertain the intent behind or meaning of the works at issue,” Judge Gerard Lynch wrote for the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in a previous ruling. “That is so both because judges are typically unsuited to make aesthetic judgments and because such perceptions are inherently subjective.”
New York Times Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak quoted Justice Thomas as saying: “Let’s say I was a Prince fan. Which I was in the 80’s.”
“No longer?” Justice Elena Kagan asked.
After the remarks went viral on Twitter, many critics had some thoughts about the justice seemingly changing his mind about the revered singer.
“Can’t trust a man who turned his back on Prince,” Rex Chapman tweeted.
“Sir, eroding our democracy is one thing but now you have gone too far,” the progressive organisation Indivisible Guide wrote.
“On top of everything else, this is impeachable behavior from Thomas,” Indivisible’s Meagan Hatcher-Mays tweeted.
“And then they laughed and laughed and then Clarence upended more than a century of legal precedent out of spite. What a couple of cards those two are!” one Twitter user said.
“Some lighthearted bantz before the It Is Illegal For Democrats To Vote ruling,” another account holder said.
“This is what it sounds like when doves cry,” Dan McLaughlin added.
“Just what I’ve always wanted: The image of Clarence Thomas rocking out to ‘Darling Nikki’,” Miranda Yaver wrote.
“Will the defendant please rise? State your name for the court...never mind. You’re being charged with one too many counts Of heartbreaking in the first degree,” Michael Rabby tweeted.
“Clearly Clarence should go back to not speaking on the bench,” one Twitter user said.
“As if we needed another reason to loathe Clarence Thomas,” Ami Berger added.
“Ok but TO BE FAIR, Prince from 84-87 was probably the best he ever was and brother, that’s pretty damn good,” Collin Reischman noted.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments