Any discussion about Clarence Thomas' concurring opinion?

[stumpysbear]

That, too is a shitshow because he de-legitimizes the Special Counsel. Precisely one of the arguments being made by TSF's lawyers in the classified docs case.

Justice Clarence Thomas used the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity on Monday to again request that the constitutionality of special prosecutors, like Jack Smith, be called into question.

In his opinion, Thomas asked the lower courts to render a ruling on Smith and the legality of the special prosecutor’s office before they proceed with Donald Trump’s pair of federal criminal cases that Smith’s team is prosecuting. No other justice signed onto Thomas’ opinion.

“If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people,” Thomas wrote. “The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the special counsel’s appointment before proceeding.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/clarence-thomas-pushes-for-another-bombshell-ruling-no-more-special-prosecutors

[duckworth969]

1. Wink and a nod to Judge Cannon

[Ms. Toad]

2. No one joined him in his opinion. So it's going nowhere. n/t

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

3. Gifted WaPo article on the same

https://wapo.st/4cneuCV

[Hermit-The-Prog]

4. It is time for lower courts to ignore the rogue Subversive Court.