Responses: 4
Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer debate the Constitution
http://www.fed-soc.org, http://www.acslaw.org Hosted for http://TheNewsBuckit.com Supreme Court Justices Scalia and Breyer talk about the Constitution at an ...
Thank you my friend Maj Marty Hogan for making us aware that August 15 is the anniversary of the birth of American lawyer, professor, and liberal jurist Stephen Gerald Breyer who serves as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Happy 81st birthday Stephen Gerald Breyer.
Background from oyez.org/justices/stephen_g_breyer
"Stephen G. Breyer
BORN Aug 15, 1938 San Francisco, CA
ETHNICITY German/Romanian/Prussian/Polish
RELIGION Jewish
FAMILY STATUS Upper-middle class
MOTHER Anne Roberts
FATHER Irving G. Breyer FATHER'S OCCUPATION Lawyer
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Aug 3, 1994 — Present
APPOINTED BY Bill Clinton
COMMISSIONED Aug 2, 1994
SWORN IN Aug 3, 1994 SEAT 3
PRECEDED BY Harry A. Blackmun
Stephen G. Breyer has spent more than two decades as a Supreme Court justice, and during that time he has cultivated a reputation for pragmatism, optimism, and cooperation with both political parties. He was born in San Francisco, California on August 15, 1938. Breyer was exposed to both the law and political activity at a very young age through his parents’ careers. His father worked for the San Francisco Board of Education as legal counsel, and his mother’s work focused on public service. Breyer attended Lowell High School and earned admittance to Stanford University in 1955. Breyer studied philosophy at Stanford before graduating in 1959 and went on to Magdelen College at Oxford University as a Marshall Scholar. He continued his studies in philosophy there as well as economics, and graduated in 1961 with First Class Honors. He returned to the United States to study at Harvard Law School, where he also worked as an editor at the Harvard Law Review. Three years later, Breyer graduated magna cum laude.
After graduation, Breyer clerked with Justice Arthur Goldberg, an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States, for his first year out of law school. He served as a Special Assistant to the Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Antitrust from 1965 until 1967. In 1967 he also earned a place as an associate professor at Harvard Law. He has maintained a position among the Harvard Law faculty in some capacity over the years and is still a lecturer there. Breyer continued his legal career as an Assistant Special Prosecutor of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force in 1973. He then joined the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, first as Special Counsel in 1974 until 1975 and then as Chief Counsel from 1979 until 1980. His position as Chief Counsel bolstered his reputation as a competent and capable legal mind among both Democrats and Republicans. President Carter appointed Breyer to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1980, a position he maintained for the next fourteen years. During this time, Breyer made a name for himself as a judge who leaned neither to the left nor the right but satisfied both sides of the aisle by remaining moderate.
In 1994, President Clinton appointed Breyer to the Supreme Court of the United States. Clinton had considered Breyer for a spot on the Supreme Court the year before as well, but Breyer lost the spot to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Breyer was so dedicated in his pursuit to join the highest United States court that he left the hospital to meet President Clinton. A few days before the meeting, Breyer was hit by a car while riding his bike. He suffered several broken ribs and a punctured lung, but not even these injuries could stop Breyer from attending his meeting. His persistence paid off, and on August 3, 1994 he took his oath to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Breyer is known for being the most pragmatic justice on the bench. His decisions are often guided by maneuvering around the real life consequences to the people affected by the decision. This principle can abandon the strict interpretation some of his fellow justices favor, particularly the more conservatives ones. Breyer opposes the originalism approach, which is most often associated with Justice Scalia and demands a strict interpretation of the language of the Constitution. Instead, Breyer suggests that the justices follow the Framer’s intent and consider the practical consequences when deciding cases. Breyer is also well-known for respecting decisions made by the legislature. However this deference does not outweigh Breyer’s desire to consider real world consequences. In 2000, Breyer wrote a majority opinion in Stenberg v. Carhart which ruled a Nebraska law banning partial-birth abortions was unconstitutional as it interfered too heavily with a woman’s right to decide on her own abortion. Recently, in 2015, Breyer dissented in Glossip v. Gross, a case dealing with the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s lethal injection process. In his opinion, Breyer wished the court would reassess the constitutionality of the death penalty, a topic the court tackled in the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia."
Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer debate the Constitution on May 14, 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4n8gOUzZ8I
FYI Sgt (Join to see)SFC (Join to see)cmsgt-rickey-denicke
SGT Forrest FitzrandolphCWO3 Dave AlcantaraCW3 Matt HutchasonLTC (Join to see)Sgt John H.PVT Mark ZehnerSGT Robert R.CPT Tommy CurtisSGT (Join to see)
SGT Steve McFarlandCol Carl WhickerSGT Mark Anderson
SSG Michael NollSFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTMSFC Jack Champion
Happy 81st birthday Stephen Gerald Breyer.
Background from oyez.org/justices/stephen_g_breyer
"Stephen G. Breyer
BORN Aug 15, 1938 San Francisco, CA
ETHNICITY German/Romanian/Prussian/Polish
RELIGION Jewish
FAMILY STATUS Upper-middle class
MOTHER Anne Roberts
FATHER Irving G. Breyer FATHER'S OCCUPATION Lawyer
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Aug 3, 1994 — Present
APPOINTED BY Bill Clinton
COMMISSIONED Aug 2, 1994
SWORN IN Aug 3, 1994 SEAT 3
PRECEDED BY Harry A. Blackmun
Stephen G. Breyer has spent more than two decades as a Supreme Court justice, and during that time he has cultivated a reputation for pragmatism, optimism, and cooperation with both political parties. He was born in San Francisco, California on August 15, 1938. Breyer was exposed to both the law and political activity at a very young age through his parents’ careers. His father worked for the San Francisco Board of Education as legal counsel, and his mother’s work focused on public service. Breyer attended Lowell High School and earned admittance to Stanford University in 1955. Breyer studied philosophy at Stanford before graduating in 1959 and went on to Magdelen College at Oxford University as a Marshall Scholar. He continued his studies in philosophy there as well as economics, and graduated in 1961 with First Class Honors. He returned to the United States to study at Harvard Law School, where he also worked as an editor at the Harvard Law Review. Three years later, Breyer graduated magna cum laude.
After graduation, Breyer clerked with Justice Arthur Goldberg, an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States, for his first year out of law school. He served as a Special Assistant to the Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Antitrust from 1965 until 1967. In 1967 he also earned a place as an associate professor at Harvard Law. He has maintained a position among the Harvard Law faculty in some capacity over the years and is still a lecturer there. Breyer continued his legal career as an Assistant Special Prosecutor of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force in 1973. He then joined the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, first as Special Counsel in 1974 until 1975 and then as Chief Counsel from 1979 until 1980. His position as Chief Counsel bolstered his reputation as a competent and capable legal mind among both Democrats and Republicans. President Carter appointed Breyer to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1980, a position he maintained for the next fourteen years. During this time, Breyer made a name for himself as a judge who leaned neither to the left nor the right but satisfied both sides of the aisle by remaining moderate.
In 1994, President Clinton appointed Breyer to the Supreme Court of the United States. Clinton had considered Breyer for a spot on the Supreme Court the year before as well, but Breyer lost the spot to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Breyer was so dedicated in his pursuit to join the highest United States court that he left the hospital to meet President Clinton. A few days before the meeting, Breyer was hit by a car while riding his bike. He suffered several broken ribs and a punctured lung, but not even these injuries could stop Breyer from attending his meeting. His persistence paid off, and on August 3, 1994 he took his oath to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Breyer is known for being the most pragmatic justice on the bench. His decisions are often guided by maneuvering around the real life consequences to the people affected by the decision. This principle can abandon the strict interpretation some of his fellow justices favor, particularly the more conservatives ones. Breyer opposes the originalism approach, which is most often associated with Justice Scalia and demands a strict interpretation of the language of the Constitution. Instead, Breyer suggests that the justices follow the Framer’s intent and consider the practical consequences when deciding cases. Breyer is also well-known for respecting decisions made by the legislature. However this deference does not outweigh Breyer’s desire to consider real world consequences. In 2000, Breyer wrote a majority opinion in Stenberg v. Carhart which ruled a Nebraska law banning partial-birth abortions was unconstitutional as it interfered too heavily with a woman’s right to decide on her own abortion. Recently, in 2015, Breyer dissented in Glossip v. Gross, a case dealing with the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s lethal injection process. In his opinion, Breyer wished the court would reassess the constitutionality of the death penalty, a topic the court tackled in the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia."
Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer debate the Constitution on May 14, 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4n8gOUzZ8I
FYI Sgt (Join to see)SFC (Join to see)cmsgt-rickey-denicke
SGT Forrest FitzrandolphCWO3 Dave AlcantaraCW3 Matt HutchasonLTC (Join to see)Sgt John H.PVT Mark ZehnerSGT Robert R.CPT Tommy CurtisSGT (Join to see)
SGT Steve McFarlandCol Carl WhickerSGT Mark Anderson
SSG Michael NollSFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTMSFC Jack Champion
(8)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
FYI A1C Ian WilliamsSFC Jay ThompsonLTC Jeff Shearer Maj Robert Thornton SGT Philip RoncariCWO3 Dennis M. SFC William Farrell TSgt Joe C.] SGT (Join to see)PO3 Bob McCordSGT Jim Arnold PO3 Phyllis Maynard SPC Douglas Bolton Cynthia Croft PO1 H Gene Lawrence PO2 Kevin Parker PO3 Craig Phillips SSgt Boyd HerrstA1C Ian Williams
SFC Jay Thompson
SFC Jay Thompson
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
FYI COL Mikel J. Burroughs LTC Greg Henning MSgt Robert C Aldi CMSgt (Join to see) Lt Col Charlie Brown SGT (Join to see) SGT John " Mac " McConnell SP5 Mark Kuzinski PO1 H Gene Lawrence PO2 Kevin Parker LTC Jeff Shearer SGT Philip Roncari CWO3 Dennis M. SFC William Farrell TSgt Joe C. SGT (Join to see)
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
FYI LTC Wayne Brandon LTC (Join to see) Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. Maj Robert Thornton CPT Scott Sharon SSG William Jones SSG Donald H "Don" Bates PO3 William Hetrick PO3 Lynn Spalding SPC Mark Huddleston SGT Rick Colburn CPL Dave Hoover SPC Margaret Higgins SSgt Brian Brakke SP5 Jeannie Carle SCPO Morris Ramsey Sgt Albert Castro
(4)
(0)
LTC David Harrison
The (obviously biased) narrative describes Breyer as "pragmatic". His job is NOT to be pragmatic, but to apply & uphold the US Constitution. Pragmatism is subjective, the Constitution is not.
One serious problem in America today is that for decades, SCOTUS Justices such as Breyer apply their own personal subjective feelings to their decisions rather than actually applying the US Constitution.
One serious problem in America today is that for decades, SCOTUS Justices such as Breyer apply their own personal subjective feelings to their decisions rather than actually applying the US Constitution.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next