According to data gathered by Stephen L. Wasby, an emeritus professor of political science at the University at Albany, Justice Thomas has written more than 250 concurring or dissenting opinions seriously questioning precedents, calling for their reconsideration or suggesting that they be overruled.
Almost one-third of the opinions concerned the rights of criminal defendants, Professor Wasby found, while others called for a fresh look at decisions on issues such as free speech, religion, voting, the separation of powers and federalism.
Recent examples are Justice Thomas’s concurring opinions in Cooper v. Harris and Abbott v. Perez, both of which assert that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does not apply to redistricting.