Clarence Thomas' lone dissent in an 8-1 SCOTUS decision about disarming domestic abusers hinged on an originalist interpretation of the law that one legal expert told BI was "absurd."Getty ImagesClarence Thomas this week argued domestic abusers shouldn't be prevented from owning guns.His lone dissent in the 8-1 SCOTUS decision hinged on an originalist interpretation of the law.One legal expert told BI Thomas's ruling shows how "absurd" originalism can be.Clarence Thomas this week offered the lone dissent in a Supreme Court decision that ultimately ruled that people with a history of domestic violence can be prevented from legally owning guns.His lengthy disagreement with the ruling in United States vs.