High Court's Thomas Seems More at Ease

By ANNE GEARAN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - For many people, Clarence Thomas will forever be the angry man behind the Senate witness table during the raucous, caustic hearings to confirm him as a Supreme Court justice.

After the 1991 hearings, the court's only black justice seemed to retreat into the closed world of the court. Even now, he rarely speaks during oral arguments and makes fewer public appearances than many of his colleagues.

However, there are signs that things may be changing. After 12 years, Thomas seems more at ease on the court and more willing to engage the public and his critics, according to lawyers and law professors who have been watching.

"It wouldn't be surprising to see Thomas coming into his own," said New York University law professor Barry Friedman.

"It's a daunting job, and he came onto the court under difficult circumstances. It might only have been a question of time, and it's been awhile, for him to start playing a bigger role."

Thomas remains a divisive figure, especially among blacks. He is at once perhaps the best-known high-ranking black person in government and a longtime critic of civil rights legislation. He opposes affirmative action.

Admirers and detractors alike were somewhat startled to learn earlier this year that Thomas had signed a mammoth book deal worth more than $1 million. He reportedly plans to promote his memoirs with his first extensive media interviews since joining the court.

The book, due in 2005, will cover Thomas' rise from rural poverty in segregated Georgia and his confirmation to the court. Thomas knows he must write about the lurid accusations of sexual harassment from a young former subordinate, Anita Hill, that dominated the hearings, lawyers say.

He also must know that he will be asked pointed questions about the episode, something he has largely avoided by avoiding the press and by carefully picking his audiences for speeches and other appearances.

"I hope it is not a payback kind of book, getting his own digs in," said John Greenya, who wrote an unauthorized 2001 biography of Thomas. "I just wish he'd say, 'This is what I believe, like it or lump it,' instead of, 'This was a high-tech lynching and I'm still mad about it.'"

Thomas gets a bum rap as a man haunted by his bitter experience, said Scott Gerber, a law professor at Ohio Northern University and author of a 1999 book on Thomas.

"He's always been more than that. He's been doing hard work on the court, and has since Day 1," Gerber said.

It's too easy to dismiss Thomas' customary silence during oral arguments as an indication that he has nothing to contribute, Gerber and other lawyers said.

Twice in recent months Thomas has electrified the courtroom by evoking the history of racial segregation during cases about cross burning and affirmative action.

Thomas typically asks only two or three questions each court term, and some lawyers see it as significant that he chose to speak on two racially charged issues. Doing so automatically put his own race on display, something Thomas has shied away from in the past.

More ideologically conservative than all but one of his eight colleagues, Thomas' influence on the court has been muted by the fact that he is often unwilling to moderate his views or unable to persuade other justices to adopt his reasoning.

That he is resolute, even if writing solo, makes Thomas a hero to many conservatives. Former solicitor general and independent counsel Kenneth Starr recently called Thomas "the Rehnquist court's most original thinker."

Thomas' independence has meant that he is not often assigned to write the majority opinion in major, narrowly decided cases. As a relatively junior justice, he is also less likely to draw plum writing assignments even when he fully agrees with the majority.

He did, however, write the majority opinion in one of last year's biggest cases, a 5-4 ruling allowing random drug testing for high school students involved in after-school activities. Some lawyers expect Thomas to write for the majority in an upcoming case that could give police more muscle to question suspects without the familiar Miranda warnings.

Known as gregarious and a little prankish in private, Thomas has let a bit of that side show in recent court appearances.

Announcing the court's verdict in a complex case about rules for some death row appeals, Thomas cracked up the courtroom with a dry observation about the case's tortuous history. The next day, a smirking Thomas dug his elbow into Justice Stephen Breyer's ribs when Breyer asked for "a straight answer" during a case about gay sex.