On the recordDecember 1, 2021
To overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to reexamine a watershed decision would subvert the court's legitimacy beyond any serious question.
Said by
Stephen Breyer
Source
msnbc.comStephen Breyer: “To overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to reexamine a watershed decision would subvert the…”
Editor's note · Context
Justice Breyer expressed concerns about the legitimacy of the court if it were to overturn established precedent.
Share
More from Stephen Breyer
Mar 23, 2024
It's not just an election. Imagine you were on the court that decided Brown v. Board of Education. Imagine that you were on the court that – that had to decide, for example, whether President Nixon was immune from giving – didn't have to…
Mar 20, 2022
If you're going to have a free enterprise economy then you must have a strong and effective antitrust law.
Mar 20, 2022
What is law supposed to do, seen as a whole? It is supposed to allow all people--all people--to live together in a society, where they have so many different views, so many different needs, to live together in a way that is more…