Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, criticized the Supreme Court for prioritizing certain cases after the justices vacated a lower-court ruling in a Florida murder case. Thomas described the case as involving an 'inconsequential foot fault' that he believed would not have affected the trial's outcome. He argued that the evidence against Gary Whitton, a death row inmate, was overwhelming, and expressed concern that the Court was neglecting more significant issues such as race, free speech, and military family matters.
In a 7-2 ruling, the Supreme Court directed the Eleventh Circuit to reconsider Whitton's request for a new trial without considering DNA evidence discovered after the original trial. The DNA evidence indicated that blood stains found on Whitton's boots belonged to the victim, James Maulden, who was found dead in 1990. The justices deemed the DNA evidence inconsequential, stating that the original jury was unaware of it during the trial.
Thomas criticized the Eleventh Circuit's reliance on the DNA testing results as a 'technicality' error and pointed out that Whitton had not exhausted his claims in state court, which could bar him from relief regardless of the Eleventh Circuit's reliance on the DNA evidence. He concluded his dissent by highlighting the Court's refusal to hear cases involving 'law-abiding citizens,' including challenges to affirmative action policies and free speech issues.