In a recent interview with Politico, former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer expressed concerns about the current conservative majority on the court potentially shaping a Constitution that 'no one wants.' Breyer, ahead of the release of his new book, 'Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism,' criticized the interpretations made by his former conservative colleagues in significant Supreme Court cases.
Breyer highlighted his opposition to 'originalism,' a lens of interpretation he considers regressive and limiting in addressing modern challenges. He emphasized that the Constitution's framers did not envision the societal changes that have occurred since its inception, such as women's suffrage and the abolition of slavery.
Regarding the 2022 Dobbs case, Breyer criticized the conservative majority's decision to leave abortion regulations to the states, predicting a complex legal landscape with varying state laws that would ultimately return to the Supreme Court for resolution.
Breyer's stance on constitutional interpretation has sparked debate, with his warnings about the consequences of a conservative-led approach drawing attention to the ongoing ideological divide within the judiciary.
As the discussion on the future of constitutional law continues, Breyer's insights shed light on the importance of balancing historical context with contemporary values in interpreting the Constitution.
