Retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is speaking out about the court’s direction ahead of upcoming cases with significant implications, including the court’s largest case on abortion access since overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, as well as a decision on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from prosecution.
In his latest book, “Reading the Constitution,” Breyer, who retired from the Supreme Court two years ago, argues for his judicial philosophy. Breyer has spent his career fighting for a more liberal, “traditional” view of the Constitution.
In his book, he also warns about the court’s conservatives’ approach, claiming that overturning old precedents, such as Roe v. Wade, and returning the question of abortion to the states has negative consequences.
“You’re overturning too many cases, and it’s causing the law to descend into chaos. Before you know it, we won’t have a clear understanding of what the law truly is,” Breyer cautioned. “What guiding principle are you using to determine that those past cases were fundamentally flawed, egregiously wrong, completely mistaken? And how do you plan to make such determinations?”
According to Breyer, the recent bolstering of the conservative majority has prevented him from pursuing a compromise with Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts had proposed a middle ground approach to potentially preserve Roe v. Wade by establishing a ban on state-level abortion restrictions before 15 weeks. Breyer acknowledges that he would have been open to joining Roberts in this effort.
Justice Breyer asserts that this case highlights the inherent flaws in the conservative approach, which solely relies on a literal interpretation of the law or the original intent of the Constitution. In contrast, he advocates for a more comprehensive analysis that takes into account the underlying purposes, consequences, and values associated with the law.
Justice Breyer dismisses allegations that the court is political, emphasizing that it is a battle of ideas.
Breyer emphasizes the respectful nature of disagreements among Supreme Court justices, particularly during their private meetings to discuss cases. He highlights that in these sessions, each justice is given an equal opportunity to speak, with the rule being that no one can speak twice until everyone has spoken once.
“It holds great significance as it ensures that everyone feels included and that their voices are heard. It creates an atmosphere where each individual believes that others have a fair opportunity to actively listen to their thoughts and opinions.”
Even though he is no longer serving on the Supreme Court, he continues to maintain an office there and actively advocates for his beliefs. Furthermore, he is dedicated to inspiring and motivating young individuals about the possibilities of the future.
