Podcast Summary: Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick

Episode Title: Clarence Thomas Said What?
Date: June 8, 2019
Host: Dahlia Lithwick
Guest: Adam Cohen (author of Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, American Eugenics, and the Sterilization of Carrie Buck)

Overview

This episode of Amicus with Dahlia Lithwick centers on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s striking concurring opinion in the 2019 Supreme Court case, Box v. Planned Parenthood. Thomas drew a historic parallel between contemporary abortion laws and the eugenics movement of the early 20th century, citing Adam Cohen’s book Imbeciles at length. Dahlia Lithwick engages Cohen in a nuanced discussion of the realities of eugenics in America, the legacy of Buck v. Bell, Thomas’s motives and logic, and the broader implications for abortion rights and American jurisprudence.

Main Discussion Points

1. The Legacy of Eugenics and Buck v. Bell (02:40–14:47)

• Carrie Buck’s Story

  • Adam Cohen recounts the infamous 1927 Supreme Court case, Buck v. Bell, in which the Court allowed for the forced sterilization of Carrie Buck, a young woman in Virginia arbitrarily deemed “feeble-minded.”
  • Cohen emphasizes that this ruling was widely supported by Progressive-era elites—including luminary justices—reflecting mainstream scientific and social beliefs of the time.
  • “This wasn't just a decision that said, well, we're not going to intrude on the right of states... This was a rousing clarion call saying, yeah, Virginia should sterilize her and we need to sterilize more of these people." — Adam Cohen (04:44)

• Why Eugenics Had Mainstream Support

  • Eugenics was considered progressive science, championed by respected academic institutions like Harvard and supported by prominent societal groups such as the League of Women Voters.
  • Resistance largely came from the Catholic Church, contrasting today’s abortion debates.
  • “The people who were doing this had progressive and sort of, you know, quote, humane ideas in mind...” — Adam Cohen (07:33)

• Carrie Buck’s Reality

  • Buck’s intellectual capacity was never adequately assessed; her “real problem was that she was born poor and she was being raised by a single mother.” (10:29)
  • Later accounts describe her as thoughtful, enjoying crossword puzzles in her retirement.

2. Historical Reappraisal and the Unfolding of Eugenics (12:02–14:47)

• Societal and judicial attitudes on eugenics shifted rapidly post-WWII as Nazi atrocities came to light.
• Eugenics lost institutional funding, but forced sterilizations persisted into the 1980s.
• Remarkably, Buck v. Bell has never been explicitly overturned by the Supreme Court.
  • “It hasn't... it's mentioned maybe slightly more than Bush versus Gore. But no, they haven't had that moment...” — Adam Cohen (14:42)

3. Box v. Planned Parenthood: The Case and Thomas’s Concurrence (15:34–18:01)

• Indiana Law

  • Included two key provisions: one barring abortions based on race, gender, or disability; another requiring burial/cremation for fetal remains.
  • The Court’s decision was considered “mild," but Cohen notes the symbolic encroachment of state authority (16:10).

• Thomas’s Opinion: Linking Abortion and Eugenics

  • Thomas, in a 20-page opinion, equated abortion and, at a deeper level, the pro-choice movement with eugenic principles.
  • Lithwick: “...it’s like a comet coming out of nowhere. Clarence Thomas is writing 20 pages about the eugenics of the situation...” (16:53)
  • Cohen refutes this as a gross misreading: “...the picture he paints of eugenics, and in particular tying it to abortion, is just completely inaccurate...” (17:45)

4. Disentangling Birth Control, Abortion, and Eugenics (18:01–20:33)

• Thomas extends the eugenics-abortion analogy to the birth control movement, specifically Margaret Sanger.
• Cohen acknowledges Sanger’s eugenicist rhetoric, but clarifies the eugenics movement was primarily obsessed with forced sterilization, not abortion, which was illegal at the time.
  • “Abortion was never involved at all. ...some of the leaders of the eugenics movement said expressly, we don't think abortion is the answer." — Adam Cohen (19:51)

5. Justice Thomas’s Motive and the Political Strategy (20:33–22:58)

• Cohen argues Thomas’s opinion is a strategic move to reshape abortion’s public perception—casting it not only as immoral but as racist and akin to Nazi practices.

  • “This is Thomas's attempt to get a second argument going... a more PC argument ... branding abortion in a new negative way.” — Adam Cohen (21:03)

• The concurrence acts as a “trial balloon” for this rhetoric, despite no other justice joining him.

6. The Real Meaning of Eugenics vs. Women’s Autonomy (25:47–27:49)

• Cohen stresses the fundamental difference:
  • Eugenics = State removes reproductive autonomy (forced sterilization)
  • Abortion restrictions = State limits personal autonomy (mandating childbirth)
  • "This is not eugenics. This is individual women making a choice. And it's wrong to say it's eugenics.” — Adam Cohen (26:49)
  • Lithwick: “Eugenics movement said, you have no autonomy. … So in that sense, it's exactly upside down…” (27:33)
  • Cohen: "The through line between these two is controlling women.” (27:49)

7. Judicial Rhetoric and Assumptions of Bad Faith (28:05–33:37)

• Lithwick draws a broader trend: recent Supreme Court opinions, especially on abortion and the death penalty, focus on imputing bad motives to ideological opponents.
• Cohen agrees, describing how the court increasingly mirrors the polarized style of cable news—with justices using “apocalyptic” or “conspiratorial” language, and creating, as in the Affordable Care Act case, dire analogies (e.g. “gun to the head of the states,” 30:51).

8. Seepage of Fantastical or “Alex Jones” Rhetoric (33:37–36:55)

• Lithwick and Cohen lament the increasing embrace of hypothetical or outright fictional scenarios in legal reasoning—e.g., fabricated stories about “post-birth abortions” and voter fraud.
• “You're seeing them make up facts, they're ignoring facts, they're making up doctrine. It feels very result oriented and as you're saying, at the fringe is a little, you know, conspiratorial and weird.” — Adam Cohen (35:33)

9. The Court’s Politicization and John Roberts’s Role (37:52–40:06)

• Cohen underscores Roberts’s genuine conservative agenda but believes Roberts is strategic and sensitive to the legitimacy of the Court.

• Rapid, radical rulings (e.g., Citizens United, Voting Rights Act) contrast with Roberts’s occasional caution.

  • "I think he's going to be as bad as he feels he can get away with.” — Adam Cohen (39:17)

• Lithwick observes that from both inside (Thomas) and outside (states rushing to legislate), there is pressure on Roberts to act fast on divisive issues like abortion (40:06).

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• Carrie Buck’s Ordeal

  • “This wasn't just a decision that said, well, we're not going to intrude on the right of states... This was a rousing clarion call saying, yeah, Virginia should sterilize her and we need to sterilize more of these people.” — Adam Cohen (04:44)

• Elite Complicity

  • “The people who were doing this had progressive and sort of, you know, quote, humane ideas in mind...” — Adam Cohen (07:33)

• Persistence of Buck v. Bell

  • “It's never been overruled... So it hasn't—you know, it's mentioned maybe slightly more than Bush versus Gore. But no, they haven't had that moment where they've said, you know, we renounce this...” — Adam Cohen (14:42)

• The Danger of Thomas’s Conflation

  • “This is not eugenics. This is individual, individual women making a choice. And it's wrong to say it's eugenics.” — Adam Cohen (26:49)

• Control as the True “Through Line”

  • “The through line between these two is controlling women. And the eugenics movement wanted to control women and tell them which ones were fit to reproduce. The abortion laws want to control women and tell them that they have to bring a child to term. That's the connection, as you say, it's the opposite of the connection that Thomas is making.” — Adam Cohen (27:49)

• The Rise of Polarizing Judicial Tone

  • “I think we're seeing some of these decisions... Roberts, in his decision, talked about it as a gun to the head of the states... Who brought a gun into this?... we're definitely seeing it in the abortion area...” — Adam Cohen (30:51)

• The Court and “Magical Thinking”

  • “We're seeing a lot more magical thinking. We're seeing a lot more made up things. And we're seeing that doctrinally too...” — Adam Cohen (34:50)

• Roberts’s Calculus

  • “I think he's going to be as bad as he feels he can get away with.” — Adam Cohen (39:17)

Key Timestamps for Segments

• 02:38 – 10:29: The history and culture of American eugenics, and the story of Carrie Buck
• 14:16 – 14:47: Buck v. Bell’s lack of reversal
• 15:34 – 16:22: Overview of Box v. Planned Parenthood provisions
• 16:35 – 18:01: Cohen’s reaction to Clarence Thomas citing his work
• 18:01 – 20:33: The distinction between eugenics, birth control, and abortion
• 20:33 – 22:58: The political and rhetorical implications of Thomas’s argument
• 25:47 – 27:49: Why abortion decisions are not eugenics; autonomy vs. state control
• 28:05 – 30:19: The growing tone of moral accusation in Supreme Court opinions
• 33:37 – 36:55: The Court’s embrace of fictional or extreme scenarios in its opinions
• 37:52 – 40:06: Will John Roberts resist or be influenced by this rhetorical escalation?

Conclusion

Lithwick and Cohen ultimately assert that Thomas’s attempt to link abortion to eugenics is a politically motivated distortion, reversing the actual historical and ethical lines drawn by both movements. The episode warns of an increasingly toxic, fact-agnostic style of judicial reasoning, with both rhetorical and doctrinal dangers for American law and equality, and places the Supreme Court’s credibility under growing strain as it is buffeted by culture-war tactics both inside and outside the institution.

[End of Summary]