Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism
mar 2024 · Distribuido por Simon and Schuster
Libro electrónico
368
Páginas
family_home
Apto
info
Acerca de este libro electrónico
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.
“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.
Acerca del autor
Stephen Breyer is a former associate justice of the Supreme Court who served there for twenty-eight years until retiring in 2022. He lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Califica este libro electrónico
Cuéntanos lo que piensas.
Información de lectura
Smartphones y tablets
Instala la app de Google Play Libros para Android y iPad/iPhone. Como se sincroniza de manera automática con tu cuenta, te permite leer en línea o sin conexión en cualquier lugar.
Laptops y computadoras
Para escuchar audiolibros adquiridos en Google Play, usa el navegador web de tu computadora.
Lectores electrónicos y otros dispositivos
Para leer en dispositivos de tinta electrónica, como los lectores de libros electrónicos Kobo, deberás descargar un archivo y transferirlo a tu dispositivo. Sigue las instrucciones detalladas que aparecen en el Centro de ayuda para transferir los archivos a lectores de libros electrónicos compatibles.
