Reading the Constitution

Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism

De: Stephen Breyer

Narrado por: Stephen Breyer

Duración: 12 h y 16 m

Resumen del Editor

A provocative, brilliant analysis by recently retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer that deconstructs the textualist philosophy of the current Supreme Court’s supermajority and makes the case for a better way to interpret the Constitution.

“You will not read a more important legal work this election year.” —Bob Woodward, Washington Post reporter and author of fifteen #1 New York Times bestselling books
“A dissent for the ages.” —The Washington Post
“Breyer’s candor about the state of the court is refreshing and much needed.” —The Boston Globe

The relatively new judicial philosophy of textualism dominates the Supreme Court. Textualists claim that the right way to interpret the Constitution and statutes is to read the text carefully and examine the language as it was understood at the time the documents were written.

This, however, is not Justice Breyer’s philosophy nor has it been the traditional way to interpret the Constitution since the time of Chief Justice John Marshall. Justice Breyer recalls Marshall’s exhortation that the Constitution must be a workable set of principles to be interpreted by subsequent generations.

Most important in interpreting law, says Breyer, is to understand the purposes of statutes as well as the consequences of deciding a case one way or another. He illustrates these principles by examining some of the most important cases in the nation’s history, among them the Dobbs and Bruen decisions from 2022 that he argues were wrongly decided and have led to harmful results.

©2024 Stephen Breyer (P)2024 Simon & Schuster Audio

Masterful

This work is one that shows both a deep understanding of jurisprudence and of the English language.

Thoroughly engaging book.

Never a dull moment. Wisely edited with a noted nod to the editors. The flow is natural. It felt like a condensed Constitution course without getting preachy. Very pragmatic ;)

A reflection of current times

This is a monumental book that clearly defines the current times and should be read by every citizen who values the concepts put forward by the Constitution and the founding fathers. It was written so that every American can understand the meaning of the Constitution without being a lawyer or a student of law.

My Opinion

I enjoyed this book because it gave me food for thought in 2024 when Democracy is being challenged and rights being removed from Americans.

Judicial “Make up your own reasoning” after the fact.

Justice Breyer assumes good intent, amongst his fellow justices. After listening to this audiobook, however, I could not help but exclaim at many different points – “judges, like everyone else, decide what they are going to do and come up with the reasoning afterwards. An “originalist” will find him or herself on the opposite side of the argument if it simply suits their preferences. I assume no such good will and it is folly to suggest something different.

Essential reading for everyone interested in democracy and the Constitution

Justice Breyer explains his methodlogy for deciding cases before the Supreme Court, a methodology that uses many sources to arrive at a decision and he rejects the reliance on or use of textualism or originalism alone to decide cases. He uses examples to explain the problems that reliance solely on the text of a statute or constitutional provision, or on what is thought to be the “orignal” meaning of the words. His methods are focused on assuring that the Constitution works today and in the future - it was designed to last through the ages. He is a wonderful reader, and this book is easily understandable by lay readers.

An eloquent argument

Justice Breyer develops an eloquent argument in support of a pragmatic approach to justice and against textualism. This is an excellent treatise on the subject.

Everyone should listen to this to understand better what is happening with the court. So helpful for context!

I thought the historical aspect was so very valuable. And the explanation of the differing philosophies was simple and easy to understand. helped so very much to understand some of what feels like chaos when watching the news. Taking the time to walk thru case examples was great learning reenforcement. Lastly, we should all realize how critical our votes are as it relates to this most important aspect of our government.

Interesting yet unconvincing

I really liked the book and enjoyed the many examples. Nevertheless, I was not convinced that “pragmatism” is significantly superior to “textualism”. Both systems are subject to bias, cherry picking, and over generalization. Both systems seem equally problematic.

The narration was quite laidback (I listened at 1.5) but excellent.

An Argument for Pragmatism

The thoughtful former Justice argues against relying solely on textualism and originalism, but instead argues for also using statutory purpose, legislative history, precedent, and workability. Justice Breyer illustrates his points by discussing individual cases. In explicating his pragmatic, sometimes apparently instinctual decision making, Justice Breyer also sometimes demonstrates the inconsistency of his method, as when he discusses the two cases addressing display of the Ten Commandments.