2026年6月1日 美国东部时间12:17:44 / 福克斯新闻网
托马斯指出了最高法院拒绝受理的涉及种族、言论自由和军属的案件
作者：伊莱恩·马伦 福克斯新闻网
发布于2026年6月1日 美国东部时间下午12:17
前弗吉尼亚州司法部长杰森·米亚雷斯在《汉尼蒂秀》中谈论弗吉尼亚州民主党人试图罢免最高法院大法官一事。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/0da91d81-08a5-4283-9f25-15e13e3e2b05
收听本文
4分钟
克拉伦斯·托马斯大法官与塞缪尔·阿利托大法官一同指责最高法院选错了审理案件。此前，最高法院以他所说的“无关紧要的技术性失误”为由推翻了佛罗里达州一桩谋杀案的下级法院裁决，称该失误“不会对案件结果产生任何影响”。
托马斯辩称，加里·惠顿基于一名检方证人作伪证提出的重审请求不会改变案件结果，因为针对这名佛罗里达州死囚的证据确凿。但他在异议书中的核心观点是抨击最高法院的优先审理事项。他列举了最高法院拒绝受理的涉及种族、言论自由和军属的案件，称这些争议更值得最高法院关注。
“令人遗憾的是，最高法院应一名定罪杀人犯的请求介入此案，纠正第十一巡回法院的无关紧要的技术性失误，”托马斯在异议书中写道，“更糟糕的是，最高法院在这样做的同时，却拒绝为守法公民纠正更严重得多的错误。”
![最高法院大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯，2026年4月15日在德克萨斯州奥斯汀德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校发表讲话。(埃里克·盖伊/美联社照片)]
在一份7比2的裁决中，最高法院裁定第十一巡回法院必须重新考虑是否应准予惠顿重审，且不得考虑原审后发现的DNA证据。该证据显示，在惠顿靴内发现的血迹属于詹姆斯·莫尔登，莫尔登于1990年10月10日被发现死于 motel 房间内，身中多刀。前一天晚上，有人看见惠顿与莫尔登在一家银行，莫尔登当时取出了自己账户的全部余额。
最高法院推翻俄克拉荷马州囚犯的定罪和死刑判决，下令重审
大法官们认定，2002年通过改进检测手段发现的DNA证据无关紧要，因为1991年初审时原陪审团并不知晓该证据。
但托马斯认为，第十一巡回法院依靠DNA检测结果驳回重审请求是一种“程序性细节”错误。
“如果说第十一巡回法院在提及DNA检测结果时确实存在错误，那至少有两个理由可以认定该错误无害，”托马斯写道，“首先，该法院全面审查了针对惠顿的确凿证据，这些证据完全足以支持其裁决。其次，惠顿甚至没有在州法院用尽救济途径，因此第十一巡回法院无论如何都不可能作出有利于他的裁决。”
![最高法院大法官塞缪尔·阿利托，2022年10月7日在华盛顿特区。(亚历克斯·王/盖蒂图片社)]
托马斯大法官抨击最高法院驳回寡妇的案件，称其放任政府逃避责任
惠顿提出重审申请的依据是，检方证人杰克·奥齐奥在庭审中作伪证，声称自己被捕前没有犯罪记录。奥齐奥曾与惠顿同囚一室，并作证称曾听到惠顿供认“‘捅了那杂种一刀’”。
惠顿提出了吉廖诉纽约案式的索赔，声称奥齐奥关于听到他供认的说法是谎言，佛罗里达州最高法院驳回了该索赔。多年后，惠顿在联邦人身保护令程序中辩称，奥齐奥谎称自己没有犯罪记录，但托马斯认为，这项索赔本应首先在州法院用尽救济途径。这意味着，无论第十一巡回法院是否不当依赖了审判后的DNA证据，惠顿都可能因程序原因无法获得救济。
![美国最高法院大法官们2022年10月7日在华盛顿特区最高法院拍摄官方合影。(奥利维耶·杜利/法新社)]
“惠顿并不否认州法院有救济途径，”托马斯写道，“但他从未就基于奥齐奥对其犯罪记录的描述提出的索赔寻求州法院救济。”
点击此处下载福克斯新闻APP
托马斯在异议书的结尾批评最高法院拒绝受理涉及“守法公民”的案件，包括波士顿大学学生家长质疑平权行动政策的诉讼——他们认为该政策构成违宪的种族歧视，反对被指压制“言论自由”的大学政策的诉讼，以及一名因公殉职的空军士兵遗孀提起的诉讼。
“当下级法院明显无视本院先例作出不利于守法美国人的裁决时，本院却经常拒绝在真正关键的时刻为他们提供救济，”托马斯写道。
伊莱恩·马伦是福克斯新闻数字频道和福克斯商业频道的撰稿人，报道全国政治新闻。
Thomas unloads on Court for helping convicted murderer but ignoring ‘law-abiding citizens’
2026-06-01 12:17:44 EDT / Fox News
Thomas pointed to cases involving race, free speech and military families the Court declined to hear
By Elaine Mallon, Fox News
Published June 1, 2026 12:17pm EDT
Former Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares discusses Virginia Democrats looking to remove Supreme Court justices on ‘Hannity.’
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/0da91d81-08a5-4283-9f25-15e13e3e2b05
Listen to this article
4 min
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, accused the Supreme Court of focusing on the wrong cases after the justices vacated a lower-court ruling in a Florida murder case over what he described as an “inconsequential foot fault” that would have had “no effect on the outcome of the case.”
Thomas argued that Gary Whitton’s bid for a new trial based on false testimony from a prosecution witness would not have changed the outcome because the evidence against the Florida death row inmate was overwhelming. But the overarching point of his dissent was a rebuke of the Court’s priorities. He pointed to cases involving race, free speech and military families that the justices declined to hear as examples of disputes he believed were more deserving of the Court’s attention.
“It is unfortunate that the Court chose to intervene at the request of a convicted murderer to correct the Eleventh Circuit’s inconsequential foot fault,” Thomas wrote in his dissent. “What makes it even worse is that the Court does so even while it refuses to correct far more consequential errors for law-abiding citizens.”
Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas spoke at the University of Texas at Austin on April 15, 2026, in Austin, Texas.(Eric Gay/AP Photo)
In a 7-2 ruling, the Supreme Court determined that the Eleventh Circuit must reconsider whether to grant Whitton a new trial without considering DNA evidence discovered after the original trial. The evidence showed that blood stains found inside Whitton’s boots belonged to James Maulden, who was found dead with multiple stab wounds in a motel room on Oct. 10, 1990. The night before, Whitton was seen with Maulden at a bank, where the victim withdrew the entire balance of his account.
SUPREME COURT TOSSES CONVICTION AND DEATH SENTENCE OF OKLAHOMA INMATE, ORDERS NEW TRIAL
The justices determined that the DNA evidence discovered through improved testing in 2002 was inconsequential because the original jury was unaware of it during the 1991 trial.
But Thomas deemed the Eleventh Circuit’s reliance on the DNA testing results in its denial a “technicality” error.
“If the Eleventh Circuit erred at all in mentioning the DNA test results, it was harmless for at least two reasons. First, the court thoroughly examined the overwhelming evidence against Whitton, which was more than sufficient to justify its decision,” Thomas wrote. “Second, Whitton had not even exhausted his claim in state court, so the Eleventh Circuit could not have ruled for him anyway.”
Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito is pictured in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 7, 2022.(Alex Wong/Getty Images)
JUSTICE THOMAS REBUKES SCOTUS FOR DENYING WIDOW’S CASE, SAYS IT LETS GOVERNMENT DODGE BLAME
Whitton’s bid for a new trial is based on the discovery that Jake Ozio, a prosecution witness, lied during the trial when he testified that he did not have a criminal record prior to his arrest. Ozio shared a jail cell with Whitton and testified that he overheard Whitton confess to “‘stabb[ing] the bastard.’”
Whitton filed a Giglio claim alleging that Ozio lied about hearing his confession, which the Florida Supreme Court rejected. Years later, Whitton argued in his federal habeas proceedings that Ozio lied about not having a criminal record, but Thomas contended that claim should have first been exhausted in state court. This means Whitton may be procedurally barred from obtaining relief regardless of whether the Eleventh Circuit improperly relied on post-trial DNA evidence.
Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court pose for their official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 7, 2022.(Olivier Douliery/AFP)
“Whitton does not deny that state-court remedies were available,” Thomas wrote. “Yet, he never sought state remedies for his claim based on Ozio’s characterization of his criminal record.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Thomas rounded out his dissent by criticizing the Court for declining to hear cases involving “law-abiding citizens,” including parents of Boston University students challenging an affirmative-action policy they argue constitutes unconstitutional race discrimination, objections to university policies alleged to chill “free speech,” and a lawsuit filed by the widow of an Air Force service member killed on the job.
“This Court routinely declines to provide relief to law-abiding Americans when it would actually matter, even after lower courts conspicuously flout this Court’s precedents in ruling against them,” Thomas wrote.
Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.
发表回复