Note that Thomas's main opinion in Carey v. Musladin garnered the full support of five other justices for a very narrow ruling based largely on federal habeas law. Three Justices wrote separately and each raised questions about allowing spectators to engage in courtroom activity that arguably might impair trial fairness.Irony Alert: Thomas was far less concerned about the constitutionally-enshrined concept of habeas in writing a vitriolic minority opininion in Hamdan v. Rumseld, the top court's most important decision in many years.
More here, but be prepared to scroll down.
Meanwhile, the New York Times disagrees with Thomas et. al. in an editorial.