Former US Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer has recently written the book, "Reading the Constitution." Breyer explores the nuances of interpreting the country's constitutional foundation and offers his guidance on constitutional thinking.

The Constitution of the United States has undergone endless deliberation about its meaning. Breyer's longstanding career gave him a unique insight into how the fundamental document should be interpreted. The book adopts a pragmatic stance toward interpreting the law, favoring practical application over rigid adherence to laws' literal wording or historical intent. 

Breyer criticizes the heavy reliance on textualism and originalism, proposing a more nuanced and flexible approach. While acknowledging the importance of starting with the language of the Constitution, he argues that a broader examination of historical context, legislative intent, and societal consequences is necessary for a comprehensive interpretation.

Challenges of Conservative Legal Approaches

In his book, Breyer warns against the conservative approach favored by some court members, highlighting its harmful effects when longstanding precedents like Roe v. Wade are overturned. He emphasizes that such actions, which send contentious issues like abortion back to the states, can create instability and uncertainty in the legal system.

Breyer expresses concern about the potential consequences of overruling too many legal cases, warning that it could lead to chaos in the legal system. He questions the philosophy behind these decisions, questioning if it was based on the notion that the prior findings were fundamentally flawed. Breyer also poses the challenge of determining how to make such judgments.

He also recounts his failure to reach a compromise with Chief Justice John Roberts, who proposed a middle path to save Roe. Breyer argues that the conservative approach prioritizes textualism and originalism and overlooks broader considerations such as the law's purposes, consequences, and values. 

READ ALSO: New Book Sheds Light on Racism in Mental Health Facility Amid Jim Crow Oppression

Addressing Contemporary Concerns

A key focus of the book revolves around maintaining the integrity of legal precedents and upholding the rule of law. Breyer voices worry about the decline in trust toward the judiciary, as evidenced by recent survey findings. He warns against the consequences of overturning established precedents based solely on textualist or originalist principles, citing the potential for chaos and instability.

Breyer emphasizes the importance of adhering to established ethical standards amid broader ethical concerns surrounding the judiciary. While acknowledging public scrutiny, he underscores the judiciary's duty to prioritize ethical integrity over public opinion. 

Breyer's book prompts readers to reflect on the judiciary's role and constitutional interpretation principles. Through his insights into judicial philosophy and experiences, he encourages readers to contemplate the complexities of legal reasoning and its broader societal implications.

Breyers concludes the book by offering guidance to specific former colleagues. In strategizing how they intend to reform the interpretive framework, they must carefully consider what will be most beneficial for both the court and the country. According to Breyer, significant changes require time, and there are ample years ahead for the newly appointed justices to deliberate on whether they wish to construct the law solely through textualism and originalism or instead utilize all the methods outlined in his book.

RELATED ARTICLE: Unveiling the Historical Tapestry: A Review of 'The Grift: The Downward Spiral of Black Republicans from the Party of Lincoln to the Cult of Trump' by Clay Cane