Former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer criticizes the Supreme Court's approach to the law, specifically the Dobbs decision, and discusses the importance of considering practical consequences and societal values in interpreting the Constitution.
Key Points
Breyer criticizes the Dobbs decision and the approach of Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett
Argues against the 'festishization' of the Constitution and the reliance on textualism and originalism
Emphasizes the importance of understanding practical consequences and societal evolution in legal interpretation
Pros
Raises important points about the role of judges in interpreting the Constitution
Highlights the need to consider practical consequences and societal values
Cons
May lead to controversy or debate among legal experts and Supreme Court followers