Justice Thomas, Oaths, and God

With all due respect to my friend Rob, I guess I don't see anything particularly worrisome about Justice Thomas's (reported) statement, during the swearing-in of Alabama's Justice Tom Parker.  (I agree, though, with Rob that Parker's mentor, Roy Moore, "dealt a significant blow to those of us who advocate for a religious presence in the public square" and also wish that Justice Thomas -- for whom I have huge respect -- had not participated in swearing in Justice Parker, who has a troubling record.)

According to one blogger, who personally transcribed Parker's remarks, Parker said:

Just moments before I placed my hand on the Holy Scripture, Justice Thomas soberly addressed me and those in attendance.  He admonished us to remember that the worth of a justice should be evaluated by one thing, and by one thing alone: whether or not he is faithful to uphold his oath - an oath which as Justice Thomas pointed out is not to the people; it's not to the state; it's not even to the Constitution, which is sworn to be supported, but it is an oath which is to God Himself.

Assuming, of course, that Justice Parker recalled accurately Justice Thomas's statement, it seems to me that what Justice Thomas said is quite correct (or, at least, perfectly reasonable):  A judge's oath -- and a judge's faithfulness to his or her oath -- is an all-the-more-weighty matter because it is not "to" the state or "to" the Constitution -- although, of course, it is the "Constitution" "which is sworn to be supported" -- but is "to God Himself." 

So, in response to Rob's question -- "was Justice Thomas suggesting that a judge's accountability is not to the people, or the Constitution, but to God?" -- I think the answer is, pretty clearly, "no."  (Or, "not in any troubling sense.") 

It is unfortunate, though, that the incident appears widely to have been misleadingly misreported.  As blogger (and law professor) Orin Kerr suggests, it seems that the whole "controversy" (see Legal Times) about Justice Thomas's remarks has been in no small part engineered to advance the agenda of crusading anti-Thomas activist, Barry Lynn, who charges that Thomas "condones religiously based defiance of the federal courts by state officials."  Nonsense.

Rick