Why former SCOTUS Justice Breyer Chooses a Purpose-Oriented Approach

As an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court for almost three decades, Stephen Breyer was no stranger to hearing arguments for cases, whether landmark, federal, or otherwise, that reached the highest court in the land. In this conversation episode, our moderator-in-chief, John Donvan and Chief Content Officer, Lia Matthow, interview Justice Breyer, to discuss his book “Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, not Textualism,”. Justice Stephen Breyer pulls back the curtain on life behind the bench—and makes a bold case for how he thinks we should interpret the Constitution and how he debated with his esteemed colleagues.

From his famous debates with Justice Scalia to his dissent in Dobbs v. Jackson, Breyer explains why he rejects textualism and originalism—and why he thinks it matters for every American. He shares insights on Roe v. Wade, the rise of conservative legal theory, and what he thinks is at stake when judges “just read the words.”

If you’ve ever wondered how the Court works—or whether it's become too political—and how cases are debated--this conversation will challenge your assumptions.

Topics include:

Why Breyer says textualism is a “false promise”

His friendship (and debates) with Justice Scalia

The truth about how decisions are made behind closed doors

How Dobbs could influence other decisions

Our Guest: Stephen Breyer, Former United States Supreme Court Justice

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan and Lia Matthow, Chief Content Officer of Open to Debate, moderates

#opentodebate #supremecourt #StephenBreyer #roevswade #scotus #judicial #law #constitutionallaw #lawandpolitics

===================================

Official site

Open to Debate Apple Podcasts

Open to Debate Spotify Podcasts

===================================