Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism
Mac 2024 · Dijual oleh Simon and Schuster
e-Buku
368
Halaman
family_home
Layak
info
Perihal e-buku ini
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.
Perihal pengarang
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.
Berikan rating untuk e-Buku ini
Beritahu kami pendapat anda.
Maklumat pembacaan
Telefon pintar dan tablet
Pasang apl Google Play Books untuk Android dan iPad/iPhone. Apl ini menyegerak secara automatik dengan akaun anda dan membenarkan anda membaca di dalam atau luar talian, walau di mana jua anda berada.
Komputer riba dan komputer
Anda boleh mendengar buku audio yang dibeli di Google Play menggunakan penyemak imbas web komputer anda.
eReader dan peranti lain
Untuk membaca pada peranti e-dakwat seperti Kobo eReaders, anda perlu memuat turun fail dan memindahkan fail itu ke peranti anda. Sila ikut arahan Pusat Bantuan yang terperinci untuk memindahkan fail ke e-Pembaca yang disokong.
