So far this year, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has dissented from more Supreme Court majority opinions than any of his liberal colleagues, and a bunch of so-called legal experts took it upon themselves to tell Newsweek why they think he does so.

Despite being part of the court's 6-3 majority, Thomas often seems to want to go even further than the other conservatives on the court. Sometimes he is joined by Justice Samuel Alito or one of the other conservatives, but sometimes he stands alone.

Out of the 17 cases ruled on by the court so far this term, 10 have been unanimous decisions.

Thomas dissented on four of the remaining cases, and none of the other justices dissented on more than three of them except Justice Neil Gorsuch, who dissented on three of them and one in part.

How the numbers stack up

In contrast, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented on three opinions, Sonia Sotomayor on two, and Elena Kagan on one.

This may not seem like too big a difference, but to Newsweek's experts, it apparently was.

Supreme Court specialist and constitutional law professor Stephen Wermiel said, "Justice Thomas has long written more dissenting and concurring opinions than just about anyone else on the Court. Last term, he was tied for the most of both dissenting and concurring opinions. He has his own views of the Constitution and federal laws, and he has never been shy about putting them out there whenever the spirit moves him."

That one may be fair--Thomas just has a lot of opinions and he is not shy about telling people what they are.

"Not surprising"

Then we have the Burton Craige Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of North Carolina, Michael Gerhardt, who said it is "not surprising" that Thomas has broken with his colleagues the most.

"I think this has been true for some time. It is because he takes the most extreme positions contrary to settled constitutional law," Gerhardt said. "He challenges precedent more extensively than any other Justice."

Any opportunity to call Thomas "extreme," it seems.

Wermiel did chime in that out of all the justices, Thomas is the most likely to want to overrule settled precedents.

"Thomas has long spelled out an agenda of established doctrines that he would overrule; he is not the least bit shy about having a list," Wermiel said.

But what if Thomas is just the only one who sees how far from the original document the courts have strayed and knows that if he doesn't say something about it, no one will?