Former Justice Stephen Breyer weighs in on SCOTUS term limits

Рет қаралды 121,647

Күн бұрын

Former Justice Stephen Breyer joins Morning Joe to discuss his new book 'Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism'.
» Subscribe to MSNBC: / msnbc
Follow MSNBC Show Blogs
MaddowBlog: www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
ReidOut Blog: www.msnbc.com/reidoutblog
MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House, The ReidOut, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and Alex Wagner who brings her breadth of reporting experience to MSNBC primetime. Watch “Alex Wagner Tonight” Tuesday through Friday at 9pm Eastern.
Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com: www.msnbc.com/
Subscribe to the MSNBC Daily Newsletter: link.msnbc.com/join/5ck/msnbc...
Find MSNBC on Facebook: / msnbc
Follow MSNBC on Twitter: / msnbc
Follow MSNBC on Instagram: / msnbc
Former Justice Stephen Breyer weighs in on SCOTUS term limits
#StephenBreyer #SupremeCourt #SCOTUS

Пікірлер: 759

@buckmudd8006 Ай бұрын

Don't explain it to us, Justice Breyer. Explain to the Conservative Judges currently ruining us.

@Craig2142 Ай бұрын

How are they ruining us? They haven't done anything unconstitutional.

@yvonneplant9434 Ай бұрын

Lll

@suehines2581 Ай бұрын

Amen. Demand SCOTUS do their job ethically.

@JoeysStolenTopSecretDocs. Ай бұрын

Yes we need term limits the minute the supreme Court has a majority conservative all the decades we had a majority leftist nobody on the left wanted term limits 😂😂😂😂. The Democrats don't follow the Constitution they've already taken away the constitutional right to life. They've already created laws infringing on our right to bear arms. They've already created laws taken away our constitutional right to free speech and practice religion by compelling Us in speech to acknowledge their gender Faith as both a physical and moral reality. Democrats ignore the right to life and then they push Jewish talmud law which is abortion all the way up to birth. This is the United States not israel. I don't know if one Democrat politician who doesn't support the Jewish talmudic law on abortion rather than supporting the Constitution

@jeremycurtis2334 Ай бұрын

To both? So we can hold those judges accountable?

@facespaz Ай бұрын

Something is needed, we can't have someone like Justice Thomas who's been compromised, and whose wife is involved in all sorts of stuff, remain on the bench for life when he won't even recuse himself from cases where he has a conflict of interest.

@LittleHobbit13 Ай бұрын

MINIMALLY there need to be ethics for recusal, where it's no longer up to the Justice to decide if they'll recuse themselves for conflict of interest. We need an ethics code that says they WILL recuse for conflicts of interest, period end of sentence.

@TooSweet4You Ай бұрын

Most corrupt, criminal SCOTUS IN HISTORY. Term limits, legal consequences for Thomas and Alito.

@dlc2112dlc Ай бұрын

Only Thomas and Alito? That's pretty one sided.

@jeffme6891 Ай бұрын

Ok then...add Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Roberts to the list.@@dlc2112dlc

@maniac2079 Ай бұрын

Why are you a communist ?

@Mr22thou Ай бұрын

Tfg is simply the figurehead of an America that's off the rails. We need to adapt. We need to make some corrections. And we need to make changes to SCOTUS before they do irreparable harm to the country. Of course, that is just one problem, but this is too limited a forum to get into it all. But most who read this know.

@jordanslingluff287 Ай бұрын

If it's that bad the legislature can impeach.......

@alaric_ Ай бұрын

No public office or position, anywhere in state, should be unlimited.

@turdferguson3475 Ай бұрын

As a conservative, I agree.

@JoeysStolenTopSecretDocs. Ай бұрын

Interesting how left is all of a sudden support this idea after conservatives took over the supreme Court. I know let's enforce this the first year Democrats take over the supreme Court.

@velocitymg Ай бұрын

The only government positions that I know are unlimited are the presidential positions of Putin in Russia, Xi in China and Kim Jong Un in North Korea. Surprise, they are all dictators who have crushed democracy.

@Muttinchopsforeverandalways Ай бұрын

@@JOECURR1488So!!

@joewearsadroolbib7347 Ай бұрын

Other than the Supreme Court!

@antinatalope Ай бұрын

Both Canadian senators and justices retire at age 75. Even the Vatican retires cardinals at 80.

@DrJillBidenLOLOLOL Ай бұрын

"We should aspire to be more like Canada or Mexico" LOLOLOL

@Muttinchopsforeverandalways Ай бұрын

You guys need to build the wall

@Phizzo4real Ай бұрын

Yeah... I don't get the rationale behind Justices dying in their posts.

@ykrgfk Ай бұрын

What has that got to do with it?

@henrynewton8809 Ай бұрын

I think there is also a 15 year limit, or age 75, whichever comes first.

@vertigo20001 Ай бұрын

Way to reframe the issue. This isn't about age it's about corruption.

@turdferguson3475 Ай бұрын

Dems have a nasty habit of calling everything that doesn't go their way "corruption".

@DrJillBidenLOLOLOL Ай бұрын

Agree, it's not about the number; its the senility

@SurprisedCroissant-lm2ct Ай бұрын

10 PERCENT FOR THE BIG GUY 👦

@ykrgfk Ай бұрын

@@DrJillBidenLOLOLOLIt is NOT about 'senility' - stop being so prejudiced against old people. The unethical, prejudiced behaviour that is the problem is a feature of both old and young. Witness your own prejudice.

@SurprisedCroissant-lm2ct Ай бұрын

@@ykrgfk LOL 😆 Biden doesn't even know where he is most of the time and he can't even take questions 😂 🤣 😅!!!!

@OohGreat Ай бұрын

*Term limits should have happened a LONG time ago*

@FortunateXpat Ай бұрын

The Senate and Congress also!

@braddavid902 Ай бұрын

Would you still want term limits if the court was a liberal majority?

@modgodel Ай бұрын

Originally it wasn't thought to be needed - only much older justices were appointed at the end of their career, with maybe 15 or 20 years at most. But republicans started appointing younger and younger people, like Roberts then kavanaugh who could be there 40 years

@modgodel Ай бұрын

@@braddavid902yes, every president should be able to appoint one or two so that the court actually reflects the will of the people as expressed thru elections

@OohGreat Ай бұрын

@@braddavid902 I sure would

@haroldmcpeake8704 Ай бұрын

Following textualism we would still have americans worth only 3/5 of a person.....so much for textualism 😮

@robertward8035 Ай бұрын

Read Dred Scott......😢

@paulas_lens Ай бұрын

Isn't that what they want?

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments wrote the Three-Fifths clause out of the Constitution.

@historyprofessor1985 Ай бұрын

From someone who teaches constitutional law, the 3/5 compromise DID NOT speak in any way about the "humanity" of any people. Rather, it settled a numerical dispute between the Northern and Southern states at the Constitutional Convention over how enslaved African-Americans were to be counted in regards to total state populations for seats in the proposed U.S. House of Representatives. Free blacks were to be counted the same way as all whites in the states, and thus there was no issue and they were not in play here. The issue came about because the Southern states wanted their whole slave populations counted with respect to seat apportionment in the House, something that would give them a HUGE advantage due to their large slave populations. By contrast, the North opposed this because of their small slave populations and the fact that enslaved people essentially had no rights and was thus unfair to count this mass of people who could not enjoy the fruits of citizenship. With that, there was a deadlock until Delegate James Wilson of Pennsylvania (who was an abolitionist) proposed a compromise where 3/5 ratio of the slave populations would be counted as opposed to the state's entire slave populations. To break it down in mathematical figures, every five slaves would count as three free people, thus 50 enslaved people would count as 30 free people or 100 enslaved people would count as 60 free people. This compromise was accepted by both sides as it significantly reduced the amount of power southern states would have otherwise had, while still allowing them to count a percentage of their slave populations. If you think they controlled matters too much before the Civil War, imagine it without the 3/5 compromise. All in all, it had nothing to do with anyone's humanity, but exclusively about the apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives.

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

@@historyprofessor1985 Seriously? Are you seriously suggesting that counting slaves AT ALL in the determination of representation was not a grotesque profanation of the principles of representative government? Seriously?

@jamesschneider2091 Ай бұрын

Yes - "life changes" since 1859 - 13 circuits require 13 judges and a BINDING code of ethics ... SCOTUS REFORM actually isn't a matter of textualism ... it just makes SIMPLE COMMON SENSE!

@denisefassbender4331 Ай бұрын

Absolutely correct!! Amen

@ggelsrinc Ай бұрын

The problem I see with a pure textualist interpretation of the Constitution is how the Preamble demonstrates the purpose of government. Consider these words: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." The recent SCOTUS decisions people have problems with don't promote the general Welfare of America, by a long shot!

@saeklin Ай бұрын

"Promote the general welfare" is a curious phrase. Conservatives would argue the use of the word "promote" rather than "provide". I'd say that "general welfare" includes opportunities and paths for the poor to elevate themselves and for extreme cases it means giving a hand to the destitute that can't elevate themselves. It also includes stuff like public roads, public schools, public parks, public water resources, clean environment, reproductive care, child care, senior care, disability care, etc. The whole point isn't just to promise prosperity but make paths to it.

@ggelsrinc Ай бұрын

Promoting the general welfare involves more than a pay check. I don't see a decision allowing unlimited political contributions that can't be traced, or the decision to do away with Roe to be promoting the general welfare. A good bit of the Republican policies don't promote the general welfare. If such things are confusing, I'd say having states officially named Commonwealths demonstrates what the Founders considered the promoting the general welfare. They weren't Communists.@@saeklin

@tammychambers9718 Ай бұрын

Enjoyed what he had to say but the description was very misleading. I didn’t hear one word from him regarding term limits for the SCOTUS.

@ASOUE Ай бұрын

Agree… no clue why that title is there

@swoondrones Ай бұрын

Why didn’t any of you ask if he thinks Trump committed insurrection? Wouldn’t that have been the most obvious thing to ask while he’s there? You are all being too polite.

@DarthSailorMoo Ай бұрын

Why ask when he obviously knows he did?

@manita2653 Ай бұрын

Sadly those guys are afraid to upset “the applecart “. They should be shouting about the hiring of NBC MSNBC of former RNC Chair Ronna McDaniels. She assisted djtRuMp with the COUP…the Insurrection. Yet, these guys REMAIN SILENT!!SHAME on THEM!🇺🇸🗽

@Ramesh98575 Ай бұрын

Him speaking out unnecessarily could cause problems with the court.

@modgodel Ай бұрын

Because they know he believes that! The whole court believes he has, they let that determination stand when they overturned the 14th amendment ballot appeal. And they just reinforced it by allowing New Mexico to bar a candidate from a state ballot for being an insurrectionist

@debbiedoodiedandi Ай бұрын

Watching his interviews during this tour, he's been pretty clear that he doesn't want to comment on any cases that are appearing before the court. He doesn't want to appear as a 10th judge.

@xlaw6272 Ай бұрын

If Justice Breyer, who I do respect as a serious Justice, is unwilling to confront the truth: that these current judges are flagrantly political, then there is nothing else I'd like to hear from him in regards to the Court.

@maryshkamiceli8388 Ай бұрын

He sure played cute with important questions from Kristen Welker. Disgusted with his interview. Noncommittal answers. Expected more definite replies from him even if contrary to current SCOTUS.

@rickemail3950 Ай бұрын

He certainly must know about the corruption in the current scotus. I was waiting for someone to ask him if the conservative justices that lied in their confirmation hearings about Roe, committed perjury. Also, what about the conservative justices getting bribes from billionaires. He seems to have his head in the clouds or can't even think in his love of scotus bubble.

@thefourthquarter7429 Ай бұрын

Yeah, he lives in delusion, thinking its about textualism or originalism vs. pragmatism. These legal theories are justifications for desired political outcomes.

@janjr165 Ай бұрын

Exactly. 🎯

@donaldcarlin6385 Ай бұрын

If Breyer thinks Scalia is " a really good guy", I don't want to hear anything else he has to say.

@franckoliver1899 Ай бұрын

or Thomas

@Constantijn09 Ай бұрын

Pragmatism is the logical approach in many discussions, but Judge Michael Luttig was right that the originalist approach to the 14th amendment section three is the only logical choice in discussing Trump. The Man is an insurrectionist, that means that he cannot participate in the General or any election for public office

@karenrapp344 Ай бұрын

Good freaking point!!! Well Morning Joe, why didn’t you bring that up?

@DoronMeir Ай бұрын

Such a likable, smart, and completely detached from reality man. He's like a physicist discussing the interesting physics of fire, while your house is burning down.

@Phizzo4real Ай бұрын

Hahaha that is exactly what I got.

@dblocker3145 Ай бұрын

He wouldn't dare criticize the institution that he was once a member, and is currently an alumni, of.

@tothelighthouse9843 Ай бұрын

Breyer is living in a dream world. He's not affected by the SCOTUS rollbacks of the rights of women, Black people, workers, poor people, homeless people, voters, old people etc. No ruling from SCOTUS will ever impact him because he's white, male & wealthy--& insulated by his wealth. So of course he's acting like all that matters are the lofty principles & how great that makes the US. But the US isn't upholding its principles when it comes to women, Black ppl, workers etc, & SCOTUS needs to be expanded NOW.

@DrJillBidenLOLOLOL Ай бұрын

He's an Israeli

@DrJillBidenLOLOLOL Ай бұрын

His early life section protects him from any criticism

@eyesseeyou803 Ай бұрын

Pssst ....your indoctrination is showing.

@britishrocklovingyank3491 Ай бұрын

@@eyesseeyou803Psst, your indoctrination is showing as well.

@britishrocklovingyank3491 Ай бұрын

@@DrJillBidenLOLOLOL Ah, antisemitism. I wondered when you were going to show up.

@catherinehartmann1501 Ай бұрын

I don't buy this apology for the current SCOTUS. Well said, but we should still "wake up" to the corruption therein.

@annakingry9157 Ай бұрын

Why? The US has no redress for corrupt Supremes.

@Raishin7 Ай бұрын

You know that's all fine and good until billionaires are buying out judges I think he's kind of conveniently forgetting that. Damage control much?

@ShwiftJustice Ай бұрын

Everyone cries term limits like the problem isn't that Dixie elects the Klan

@suehines2581 Ай бұрын

Unfortunately you describe where Iive.... I love the coast. Thank oil companies , corruption, corporations: $$$.

@jewulo Ай бұрын

Is it the Klan or capitalism?

@DrJillBidenLOLOLOL Ай бұрын

@@suehines2581sounds like you should move?

@spankyssurprise1361 Ай бұрын

The Klan? There are only around 3000 Klan members left in this country...stop hyperventilating.

@marywallace4086 Ай бұрын

Sue Hines I was born and raised in Alabama and at 83 I still live here, moving to Fairhope soon. But I still speak out against Trump Turbeville Katie Britt and all Republicans Republicans every chance I get. Vote blue please

@joemartinez4997 Ай бұрын

I hear and understand what he says, and what his book might say. But actions speak louder than words and seeing what the Supreme court has been doing, and accepting all those lavished gifts. Tells a different story. And I bet he knew about all those gifts that were accepted. And how is has no opinion what is going on. Doesn't he realize he is no longer on the seat. That is the problem with a lot of people. Don't want to upset others. I for one will not be buying his book.

@tonymeinerding7463 Ай бұрын

Not politics! Please!!!

@yanstev Ай бұрын

Justice is not supposed to be influenced by political power. It is supposed to be an impartial mediator of the law. There are good reasons why the current SCOTUS has lost so much public trust.

@user-tu2hk2qm6x Ай бұрын

Do something about Cannon....this ridiculous 2 scenarios...asking the jury to interpret the law-instead of the judge explaining the law to them-.....

@TheSteveBoyd Ай бұрын

He sounds delusional, tbh. No politics in SCROTUS? Give me a break!

@stevegodwin6416 Ай бұрын

All due respect to Justice Breyer, but it's fairly plain to see that politics, along with corruption, plays a huge role in the decisions being handed down by the current SCOTUS.

@ericlipps9459 Ай бұрын

The snail analogy is perfect. Trump leaves a trail of slime behind him wherever he goes.

@drzarkov39 Ай бұрын

This title is a lie. Breyer never weighed in on SCOTUS term limits.

@innerlocus Ай бұрын

But Trump always puts -Amer- 'I' -ca- first.

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

Donald Trump lost the popular vote in 2016, but got to nominate three Supreme Court Justices. The most urgent need is to get rid of the Electoral College, a provision of the Constitution meant to enhance the political power of slaveholders.

@Mr.White10-65 Ай бұрын

Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg should of took the hint from Obama to retire while he was in office? Why the "term limit" talk when things don't go your way?

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

@@Mr.White10-65 Many prominent legal scholars of both liberal and conservative leanings have been advocating term limits for fifty years. Do a little research into the condition of Justice William O. Douglas during the last several years of his tenure on the Court and you will understand why.

@Mr.White10-65 Ай бұрын

@@markkozlowski3674 I will, but it won't change the point I made.

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

@@Mr.White10-65 And while you are at it, do a little research into the drive of Speaker of the House Gerald Ford's campaign to impeach Chief Justice Earl Warren. Also look into Tom DeLay's campaign to impeach several liberal federal judges in the 1990's.

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

@@Mr.White10-65 Also do some research in Speaker of the House Gerald Ford's campaign to impeach Chief Justice Earl Warren.

@JohnC-yx5tq Ай бұрын

Canada has a good model for this. "A judge holds office during good behaviour until he or she retires or attains the age of 75 years, but is removable for incapacity or misconduct in office before that time by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons." Similarly, we have a 75-year age limit for Senators.

@corgilove2070 Ай бұрын

And there's certainly been misconduct among some justices...

@JohnC-yx5tq Ай бұрын

@corgilove2070 yes there has. Most recently Russel Brown. It wasn't for judicial impropriety though, just a drunken tirade while on vacation. Imagine if the US had such a low bar for removal. That would be progress.

@brothertaro2008 Ай бұрын

Term limits are a nice idea, but there's no viable political route for getting there. The only solution is voting BLUE (which more people should have done in 2016 .... would have spared us this dumpster fire).

@JoeBidensFortificationPatrol Ай бұрын

Agreed, Dementia Daddy is a dumpster fire. But the Democrats ran with Hillary and the slogan "It's her turn"...LOL

@Mr.White10-65 Ай бұрын

Running Hillary as a candidate and Ruth Bader Ginsburg not taking the hint to retire are REALLY the reasons why you are in what you believe to be a "dumpster fire".

@TheseusAthena Ай бұрын

I have the outmost respect for justice Breyer. He almost made me forget about the Federalist Society.

@rayjay238 Ай бұрын

Justices can be bought with post retirement jobs.

@TheMadelineTV Ай бұрын

Na Justices are being Bought With Life Term Hunting Trips, RV Travel, Yacht Trips, World Travel you name it!

@micheleconner5083 Ай бұрын

@@TheMadelineTVexactly what I was thinking! We've already got two justices(that we know of) who have been bought! Not sure about Kavanagh. Where did he get that money to pay those huge bills off? Maybe that was his buying off.

@henrynewton8809 Ай бұрын

No matter what rule or law you can come up with, no matter how good or well intentioned it is, there is someone out there who will corrupt it!

@janiebuck2938 Ай бұрын

He's a little too happy/clappy to me. SCOTUS and the courts have failed us so miserabley, how could anyone have any respect for the law?We have to follow the law, but we don't have to respect it!

@agentxyz Ай бұрын

There are 2 campers. One puts on his shoes to run away from the bear. The other is Clarence Thomas who jumps into his RV

@joshuastanton6731 Ай бұрын

“This is not political.” What?! All justices are appointed by presidents who are by their very nature political.

@JodieAprilMae Ай бұрын

The justice system should be APOLITICAL, not party based… the idea that Supreme Court Justices should be able to be have free holidays paid for by billionaires, the idea that billionaire wives can be allowed to influence Supreme Court Justices… utterly crazy… JUDGES SHOULD INTERPRET LAW OBJECTIVELY NOT POLITICALLY!!

@sheilaakins_swain4725 Ай бұрын

SCOTUS should have a Term Limits

@derekking2662 Ай бұрын

This guy just claimed recent decision by Scotus is not based on politics, what is he smoking ?

@ShwiftJustice Ай бұрын

Lately they're based on pure Christofascism

@bonitasilver9379 Ай бұрын

Going on the track record of the USA..... Nothing will be done.

@Lance0714 Ай бұрын

A law applies to all people equally. Except Trump and uncle Thomas

@eyesseeyou803 Ай бұрын

Pssst......😂😂😂😂😂

@blomeup2day Ай бұрын

It would have been nice if the clip matched the title

@tommcfadden5232 Ай бұрын

I’ve noticed this has been happening more frequently as of late?

@johnbrown4949 Ай бұрын

Hiring a woman who threw her own family under the bus? Your friends say a lot about yourself. Someone at nbc has the same integrity as Mcdaniels.

@manfromthesky91 Ай бұрын

I think it is very difficult for a lot of people to accept just how quickly and drastically things have changed in this country, and I can understand why. So much of what is currently happening was unthinkable and would have sounded absurd just a decade or two ago. I'm sure that in Breyer's experience, what he's saying is true. But it is true about a scotus that no longer exists. I hope we can get back to that vision of justice some day--I really do believe in the importance of people with different views moving this country forward together and finding common ground--but right now there's no question that extreme partisanship has corrupted our courts at every level, and the people behind it are hoping everyone who might oppose them will be convinced we're just being alarmist so they can continue to twist our laws to their liking without any resistance or consequences. Breyer's approach to interpreting the constitution is brilliant and I'm glad he's working hard to pass on his knowledge, but sadly I don't think he's right about the current state of scotus.

@oakstrong1 Ай бұрын

One of the best interviews I've ever watched on American News! I wish I was that fifth grader the judge was teaching, I might have learned something more valuable than many others I sat through.

@cornrunner2996 Ай бұрын

Like all Supreme Court justices he is in love with himself. They are all full of it.

@1369jsj Ай бұрын

and the electoral college should be done away with. not needed anymore

@ogoshen Ай бұрын

Hey Mr. Breyer, how about some INTEGRITY in the SC? Yes? No? Do you think that would matter?

@Knight3rrant Ай бұрын

Textualism fails to meet the needs of our modern republic and society because of one factor: context. Context changes. New factors and situations which are entirely novel to the framers of each paragraph of the Constitution and its amendments. The clear and amazing combination of intellect and wisdom of Justice Breyer is something we are missing in six of the nine justices currently on the Supreme Court.

@user-cr8xw9wi6j Ай бұрын

If its not politics, Steve, then why are these justices taking so much money and gifts from rich white republican men? Hes dancing around, they always try to protect their institution.

@user-cv1vk9hb5d Ай бұрын

Breyer explains things concerning law better than most of the current Justices.

@TevrenEndrigan Ай бұрын

Hey MSNBC, nowhere in this clip does fmr Justice Breyer weigh in on SCOTUS term limits! Do better!

@wendygermain808 Ай бұрын

his answer(s) when asked about Bush v Gore, and others showing that the court acts very quickly. In this case, the DC court was very clear about immunity. Any first year law student could answer the case in 20 minutes. The court is stalling and helping trump/ period end of sentence.

@LittleHobbit13 Ай бұрын

I think the recent lean toward Textualism IS that "political motivation" people are taking issue with, because the "as written" language" is built for an older version of the country which Conservatives are desperate to return us to. So Textualism is to their political advantage. For my money, I can't understand the argument for Textualism/Originalism as a form of "honoring the founding fathers' intentions" when literally the guy who wrote it said "reevaluate this thing like once every 20 years because future generations shouldn't be strictly beholden to what we wrote". Jefferson was SUPER clear in his intention, so to say we can't change a single word in the Constitution is actually the OPPOSITE of "Originalism".

@J5L5M6 Ай бұрын

Why can't Fmr. Justice Breyer still be on the Court? Definitely going to read his book.

@corgilove2070 Ай бұрын

He voluntarily retired...

@J5L5M6 Ай бұрын

@@corgilove2070 Well, yeah, I understand that. I'm simply saying that we as a public would benefit from justices more in the shape of Breyer than the likes of Kavanaugh or Coney Barrett...

@carroux4050 Ай бұрын

This was 100% a political decission. He is not getting younger so he retired while a Democrat is still President to be replaced by a liberal judge (Judge Jackson). Imagine, he wouldn't have done that, dies in 2 years and Trump is President again? Then we would have 7:2 instead of the bad 6:3 ....

@danielleallen9678 Ай бұрын

I feel like he is out of touch and has no idea how different things are in these times.

@teddyquinn7704 Ай бұрын

I had to unsubscribe from NBC & affiliates due to the hiring of a traitor. Bad news.

@maryshkamiceli8388 Ай бұрын

I would have liked his answer to how much Leonard Leo influences the SCOTUS and federally-appointed judges around the country. Answers to pointed questions into the current judicial climate are vital.

@romanmartinez6458 Ай бұрын

Joe , Mika, and company showed so much respect for this man. I love that.

@ericlautzenheiser2958 Ай бұрын

No discussion of SCOTUS term limits. Misleading.

@kevinkevin4985 Ай бұрын

The president is limited to 8 years. It seems reasonable to limit a justice to eight as well. But the senate majority leader should not be permitted to deny a vote on the presidential appointments.

@pauloramos7593 Ай бұрын

Justice Stephen Breyer is an amazing person... respect !

@jim.pearsall Ай бұрын

Terrific interview… what a great guest. 👏🏻👍🏻🙏🏻😃

@rhett163 Ай бұрын

BRAVO Justice Breyer!!!

@kathleenaustin327 Ай бұрын

How far we have fallen. What a shame.

@rockyroad-hq7hz Ай бұрын

Retired Justice Bryer's antics in explanation. It's giving us a complete resolution on the mechanics of the highest court on the land. Perhaps the process of accountability. As a third pillar of democracy, on why urgency for one and not another??

@bellepepper4201 Ай бұрын

He can't say that it is about method of reading and that it's not "political" because the Federalist Society (which is linked to GOP) chooses only textualist judges to put up to the Supreme Court, and these textualists are chosen by a Republican President and a Republican majority senate.

@druwk Ай бұрын

Lifetime appointments allow the Justices to be out of touch with the Law and Country they serve.

@afry6400 Ай бұрын

While I understand his explanation, I think it's highly likely he isn't paying attention as closely as he should be to the justices in question or their opinions. Some of them are clearly corrupt... by their own actions they have been quite bold and plain about it.

@spoda81 Ай бұрын

What a great man to interview and Joe didn't interrupt him once

@corgilove2070 Ай бұрын

Mmmm...I think Joe remained silent because... What can you say to someone like that who should know better. Hoping for wisdom and SC insight, but only getting smiling and outdated platitudes about the current state of affairs in the SC.

@kittendiotima4212 Ай бұрын

I'm SO glad that FINALLY liberal jurists are communicating their jurisprudence. I like the term, judicial pragmatism, and we need that, in the information age, we needed a term to distinguish conservative jurisprudence from liberal jurisprudence. When the Founders created lifetime appointments for the judiciary the average lifespan for an upper class white man was around late 40s/early 50s. Our early presidents generally appointed Justices in their early 30s, so they were expecting judges to be on the bench around 18, 20 years. Now that Justices are living so much longer, 18 year term limits seem reasonable, in fact actually, the best way to be in alignment with what the Founders wanted.

@andypandy9013 Ай бұрын

Members of the UK Supreme Court are retired by law at the age of 75. It was 70 but the right wing Conservative Party raised it to 75 some years ago.

@swoondrones Ай бұрын

How not to answer a question. He’s just a smooth talker, but not saying anything.

@sharcon3891 Ай бұрын

He sure likes to hear his own voice.

@TeePetersen Ай бұрын

I wonder how different the current SCOTUS is from the ideal he discusses. I suspect they are two, far different, animals indeed.

@takeittodabank998 Ай бұрын

Breyer is 85 years old and still speaks with a clarity few, half his age, can match.

@hsheist9407 Ай бұрын

The basic difference between an authoritarian point of view and a democratic point of view ... the the first will no be changed by reason or reasoning. When the first are empowered as "justices" and several are loaded at one time, you have an authoritarian doctrine that will not be changed by reason ... ie unreasonable and supported by force..

@matzrat5006 Ай бұрын

The rule of law, what a bunch of BS.

@VMorgenthaler-yp6yz Ай бұрын

Not just a term limit (12 years), but no one can be an SJ justice before the age of 55, and they must have been a presiding judge somewhere for at least ten years. That way, they leave a trail we can use to figure out if they are too extreme, or lie during the confirmation hearing. No more lifetime appointments. The President only gets 8 years.

@PinkSparkleyPeep Ай бұрын

💙💙💙yes we need to change not go backwards 💙💙💙💙💙💙

@t.a.k.palfrey3882 Ай бұрын

Trite though such an idea may appear, the root of what Justice Bryer correctly identifies as the problem with recent Supreme Court decisions, is down in the weeds of the US education system. Unlike other western countries, at US schools students are not encouraged to think critically. The constant use of multiple choice tests allows only for simplistic answers. There's no room for nuanced meaning, contextual replies, or what the Justice calls pragmatic thought.

@KRO425 Ай бұрын

This was delightful. I was so glad he wasn't rushed along to keep pace with live tv. Whether you agree or disagree, there is something to be learned from the man.

@michaelsinger4638 Ай бұрын

It’s absurd that any position would be unlimited. There’s ZERO accountability.

@debeichmann236 Ай бұрын

The man appears to be very condescending.

@britishrocklovingyank3491 Ай бұрын

He's a judge. By his very nature he feels superior.

@user-mi6zq6jh8c Ай бұрын

yes: he acts as though he is still sitting on the bench and has total control.

@georgechickful Ай бұрын

I gave up at 4 minutes odd, pointless blather unrelated to reality didn't help. Blatantly lying justices who lied to everyone, people didn't believe them either, but didn't think they'd get a chance to overturn Roe or would be so shameless. Why is he covering for these people, there's nothing they can do to him now.

@markkozlowski3674 Ай бұрын

Harvard Law School professors do tend to get that way.

@greeceuranusputin Ай бұрын

He should have said the snails were his lunch.

@ohotnitza Ай бұрын

12 minutes about his pragmatism book, not term limits. The title is misleading

@t.tenney3470 Ай бұрын

Term limits sound great.

@Swnsasy Ай бұрын

We need Democrats to have all 3 branches and push them to impeach Clarence!! Should absolutely be limits!!

@SqueakyWeasel247 Ай бұрын

Have you guys commented on RRMcD appointment yet? Because if nothing is said I'm gonna be done here too!

@davidpowellseattle Ай бұрын

This republic is an example to the planet. It must be enabled to to survive in a changing world. Make enlightened decisions!

@philipemerson473 Ай бұрын

Mr. Justice Breyer, the right book at the right time. Thank you.

@catdavis9328 Ай бұрын

Need term limits asap. Ridiculous, one sided,

@CHR588 Ай бұрын

Nothing Matters Our justice system is a Complete Joke.

@rebeccacamacho-sobczak4282 Ай бұрын

I alsso noticed: These interviewers arer much more discerning in their discussions with this gentleman other than the fractured interview shown on CNN.

@rebeccacamacho-sobczak4282 Ай бұрын

...and THAT'S the reason Democracy is so difficult.

@kennyjames4679 Ай бұрын

Term limits, outside oversight and clear and set rules and moral codes. The court is literally a court of kings and queens at this point, there is no oversight and they have life long terms, it's completely insane.

@tilltill2071 Ай бұрын

Where is the Justice's take on term limits?

@jacekpaszkowski2000 Ай бұрын

"Textualism" did a lot of good with Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled Section 3 null and void.

@corgilove2070 Ай бұрын

Biden should dissolve the "Supreme Court" for a while... He probably can't, but somebody needs to ride herd and rein them in.

@sergiochavez3769 Ай бұрын

Supreme Court justices should be limited to no more than 12 years.

@TheScandoman Ай бұрын

Considering the fact that all 9 of them should be impeached and removed and indicted and convicted and incarcerated, term limits for the justices on the (NOT so) Supreme Court' are kind of a moot point at this stage! I would really like to hear what retired Justice Breyer has to say about the Abomination that has befallen us!