SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 11, 2007
Justice Breyer Unhappy With Outcomes
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer Says Despite Difficult Term, He Still Believes In Rule Of Law
-
Stephen Breyer, as US Supreme Court Associate Justice, speaks during the John Kenneth Galbraith Honor Lecture, Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 18, 2006. (AP / file)
-
Interactive The Supreme Court History, traditions and key cases, plus what it takes to get on the bench.
"I was in dissent quite a lot and I wasn't happy," Breyer said at the American Bar Association's annual meeting.
Breyer was one of four liberal justices who dissented in cases involving abortion rights, school integration and pay discrimination. In the school case, in which the court struck down student assignment plans in Louisville, Ky., and Seattle, his frustration bubbled over in a lengthy dissent that was twice as long as any he had written in his 13 years on the court.
Yet with the passage of some time, Breyer said the court's term underscored his faith in the rule of law.
"When I look at it objectively, I think how I wish I'd won, but I also think, not a bad system," Breyer said.
"I'm not going to be in the majority all the time. How I wish I were, but that's the system. That's called the rule of law," he said.
Earlier, addressing another ABA audience, Breyer said the major division in the world is between people committed to resolving disputes through a system of laws and those who are not.
Breyer praised the group's volunteer effort to train lawyers and judges around the world to adhere to the rule of law, despite changing political environments.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Breyer said: "I began to see that the true division of importance in the world is not between different countries. The important division is between those who are committed to reason, to working out things, to understanding other people, to peaceful resolution of their differences ... and those who don't think that."
He said the nine justices on the court were unanimous in that belief, even as they disagree vigorously over the issues that come before them.
At the time of the attacks, Breyer said, he was in India with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor to meet with judges and lawyers there. Even as American diplomats wanted to send the justices home immediately, they insisted on going ahead with meetings to demonstrate the strength of the U.S. system, he said.
Since 1990, the ABA has sent lawyers to emerging democracies to promote anti-corruption laws, criminal law reform and formation of an apolitical corps of judges.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From Politics
Add a Comment See all 51 Comments
- Too bad there are such disrespectful out there........... look forward to your posts
Posted by JDUBS63 at 03:45 PM : Aug 12, 2007
The more he posts the more it obvious that the posters childish enough to do it was infidel_us.
Rather pathetic. - Reply to this comment
- So starting this morning no more RandalDS, just SgtRDS from now on.
Posted by SgtRDS at 02:00 PM : Aug 12, 2007
A tu*rd by any other name......so now you'll be known as SgtB$. Same lib loser....different day. - Reply to this comment
- is american muslims would have spoken up against the trashing of the towers back in sept 11, 2001
could they have averted the war? - Reply to this comment
- drivelphobe, hope you post more often.
- Reply to this comment
- SgtRDS.....I was wondering what was going on because it did not sound like you at times.It happened to me by 2 people who post all the time only they got my e-mail and I had to change that. Too bad there are such disrespectful out there........... look forward to your posts
Posted by JDUBS63 at 03:45 PM : Aug 12, 2007
Thanks, I'm not sure who it is that came up with stealing my signon, but it's a pretty dam*n childish thing to do, so it could be any one of 4 or 5 right wing trolls. To tell the truth though I sort of like this one better anyway and there's not really a way to copy it. - Reply to this comment
- SgtRDS.....I was wondering what was going on because it did not sound like you at times.It happened to me by 2 people who post all the time only they got my e-mail and I had to change that. Too bad there are such disrespectful out there........... look forward to your posts
- Reply to this comment
- Not Clinton, per se'. But the media that made it such a controversy. Why? Because the cold war was over. Because the lady married a prince. Because people's court says kids shouldn't sue their mothers and fathers.
Its just too much, ya see. And its not too much reality, but rather; too much bullshyyt. All politically based.. All some politicians play to look good. I still don't know who killed Chandra Levy. And I guess I'm not supposed to know. Sure was a headline though. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by sandycat2 at 11:44 AM : Aug 12, 2007
+ report abuse
Oh don't worry we will find a way, folks are still bashing Clinton so I say what goes around comes around. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by SgtRDS at 02:00 PM : Aug 12, 2007
+ report abuse
O.K. Sarge got it have a great day. - Reply to this comment
- Impeachment DOES NOT remove a president from office.
To "impeach" means to "accuse"
The House of Representatives may have the sole authority to "impeach"
however, it is the Senate that has the sole power to remove a person from office.
It takes 67 Senators to remove anyone from office, and there are only 50 Democrats.
It will never happen.
AFTERALL, BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED, YET HE REMAINED IN OFFICE.
... - Reply to this comment
Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror.
