Former Justice Stephen Breyer: It’s ‘possible’ Dobbs could be overruled one day

WASHINGTON
—
Former
Supreme
Court
Justice
Stephen
Breyer
said
it’s
“possible”
the
Supreme
Court
could
one
day
overrule
its
2022
decision
in

Dobbs
v.
Jackson
Women’s
Health,
which
itself
overruled

Roe
v.
Wade.

“But
who
knows?”
added
Breyer,
speaking
to
moderator
Kristen
Welker
on
NBC
News’
“Meet
the
Press.”

The
former
justice
also
spoke
about
the
leak
of
the
majority’s
decision
to
overturn
Roe,
which
preceded
the
official
ruling
by
several
weeks,
calling
it
“unfortunate.”

Breyer
also
sidestepped
questions
about
several cases before
the
court
this
year
involving
former
President
Donald
Trump.

Asked
about
one
Trump
case
coming
before
the
court
regarding
the
former
president’s claim
that
he
should
be
immune from
criminal
prosecution
for
his
efforts
to
overturn
the
2020
election,
Breyer
said
he
wouldn’t
comment
and
didn’t
have
enough
information
to
form
an
opinion.

“My
goodness,
you
can
make
mistakes
just
by
saying
what
your
initial
opinion
is.
And
my
goodness,
how
often
it
really
occurs,”
Breyer
said,
adding:
“I’m
not
just
trying
to
get
out
of
the
question,
because
I
can
get
out
of
the
question
by
just
saying
I’m
not
going
to
answer
the
question.”

Still,
Breyer,
who
was
appointed
by
President
Bill
Clinton
and
served
on
the
court
from
1994
to
2022,
isn’t
a
stranger
to
evaluating
cases
in
the
middle
of
presidential
election
years
that
could
have
major
consequences
for
the
outcome
of
the
election.

In
2000,
Breyer
weighed
the
Bush
v.
Gore
case
and agreed
with
a
7-2
majority
decision that
the
method
for
recounting
ballots
in
Florida’s
presidential
election
was
unconstitutional.
But
he
dissented
from
a
majority
opinion
that
found
Florida
didn’t
have
time
to
conduct
a
constitutional
recount.

“They
shouldn’t
have
taken
[the
case]
up,”
Breyer
told
Welker.
“That’s
what
I
thought
about
Bush
v.
Gore.”

He
added,
“I
said,
‘They
shouldn’t
have
taken
up
the
opinion.
And
now,
having
taken
it
up,
I
think
they
should
decide
it
the
other
way.’
That
was
my
view,
all
right?
But
it
was
a
view
reached
after
a
considerable
amount
of
work.”

Breyer
spoke
to
NBC
News’
“Meet
the
Press”
ahead
of
the
release
of
his
book
“Reading
the
Constitution:
Why
I
Chose
Pragmatism,
Not
Textualism,”
in
which
he
lays
out
his
case
against
an
originalist
interpretation
of
the
Constitution.

“It’s
very
attractive,”
Breyer
said,
describing
textualism
as
“simple.”

“All
you
have
to
do
is
read
this.
Fabulous.
You’ve
got
the
answer.
Yeah,
just
read
it,
and
it’s
simple,”
he
said.

“You
say,
‘Sounds
good,
sounds
good.’
But
it
doesn’t
work
very
well,
in
my
opinion.
And
that’s
why
I’ve
spent
a
year
and
a
half
trying
to
explain
why,”
Breyer
added.