Exelon Corp. v. Department of Revenue

JUSTICE THOMAS,

specially concurring:

My colleagues are firmly convinced that they have the science of this issue correct. Unfortunately, science does not answer the question before the court, and the majority has its history and its law wrong. Consequently, I cannot join its opinion.

Two fundamental misunderstandings underlie and inform the majority opinion. The first is the mistaken belief that the central question we must resolve is whether a majority of this court believes that electricity is tangible at the subatomic level and not whether the legislature intended to include electricity…