Clarence Thomas criticizes Sixth Circuit for legal inconsistencies

Justice Clarence Thomas criticized the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for failing to adhere to legal precedent in a dissent regarding the case of David Smith, who was convicted of attempted murder. The Supreme Court upheld the Sixth Circuit's ruling, which found that Smith's conviction relied on an unduly suggestive identification process, infringing on his due process rights. Thomas argued that the panel's decision disregarded the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) and previous Supreme Court rulings, stating that the appeals court could not reevaluate evidence without clear justification. He condemned the Sixth Circuit's approach as a blatant disrespect for the rule of law, emphasizing the importance of following established legal standards. The dissent highlighted a pattern of errors by the Sixth Circuit that has led to multiple reversals by the Supreme Court. As a result, Smith's case must be retried unless the state can provide valid reasons for his continued imprisonment.