It’s ‘possible’ Dobbs could be overturned: Justice Breyer interview part 1 

@jerbear1601 Great comment!

THANK YOU! This was well said and sums it up perfectly.

...and those who cannot hear what's not being said are claiming to know things.

Single best comment in the history of RU-vid comments!

Agree

The blatant corruption and twisting the law to fit their desired outcome makes them not trustworthy to anything.

What do YOU think!!!!

Yeah...blah blah blah...I'm an old white guy who has retired but maybe I can sell a few useless books.

Magas are allergic to books.we get it.

That’s exactly what he wanted to do, promote his book. Welker just wanted dirt, juicy gotcha questions. And she’s not all that good at thinking on her feet. I found him to be of high integrity not going down to her level. It’s not his goal to “make news” and she should have prepared herself better to get Justice Breyer to engage rather than to expect him to dish gossip.

Yey he sat there and claimed they didn't have the same reason to answer these questions or give a personal opinion on anything. He was there promoting a book to make money & shes there to promote his book and make money.

Yep Liberals love holding to their high minded ideals while the country slides toward Fascism. The most important thing isn't using your credibility to make the public aware of the danger we are in. This most important thing a former Justice can do is avoid the appearance of trying to influence The Court. A textual reading of legal norms if you will. One could hardly expect Justice Breyer to consider the pragmatic interpretation of norms when the US is staring down totalitarianism.

I'm wondering if you are familiar with the difference between textualism and pragmatism? He said quite a lot actually

If you have a chance to ask or pose questions to a Former Supreme Court Justice, one that has been vocal or adament about abortion or other issues and you are a News Org, you air it, no matter what was discussed. It's importance makes the mark to air regardless of what answers were given.

Waste of time interview!! Nothing gained here !!

They should have got John Oliver to dub over Breyer, changing the answers to jokes. It would have been more informative.

Considering that the SCOTUS overturned the Dobbs decision, wouldn't it be considered settled law now? If people think it was settled law when Dobbs was passed, shouldn't it be the same now?

Why stop there? Let’s bring back Plessy versus Ferguson

And Alito

​​@@1965Grit the problem with Dobbs is that the right wing "justices" perjured themselves to be seated. I won't mention alito, "Boofer" and Thomas's questionable financial histories. Once they had the numbers, they ignored the clear wishes of "we the people". Typical right wing b/s.

And still is

Except, there are good and big reason why a judge or justice should not make comment on current or future case law. But yes, it is very frustration how close to the vest they are. The part that I'm curious about is his feelings on the situation with justices receiving gifts.

It’s not Justice Breyer’s job to endear the public to the dignity and legitimacy of the Supreme Court. He DID his job with dignity and legitimacy and he was being asked to get down in the gutter and confirm what we already know about the currently dishonest judges. Shame on her for playing games with his time. It was demeaning, condescending, and embarrassing to watch. She should never be given another important interview.

Honestly! If he doesn’t want to answer questions, fine. BUT THEN DECLINE THE INTERVIEW! So annoying. He thinks he’s being so clever, and he just wants to promote his book 🙄🤨

​@@rachelhforsyth-tuerck9509absolutely! This was the most irritating interviewee I've seen! She's being mistreated by his snarky sarcastic evasions! And arrogance.

He’s intentionally vague.

This issue could devastate the GOP for a long time to come. To not be able to change it provides us voters. Right to life attacked on this issue and it did hurt democrats all throughout the 70s and 80 and beyond.

Your comment saved me wasting the time to watch it. (Along with the other "says nothing" comments to back you up.)

he's selling a book, and archiving his likeness

Yeah, as a FORMER Supreme Court Justice before whom NO cases are pending I'm not sure why he can't comment on current issues. If anything I would think that what's off limits are past private deliberations.

He sits by designation on the 1st Circuit still so not entirely accurate.@@ZZSmithReal

IDK, maybe ask him about his book, which he was there to promote!?

@@ZZSmithReal No, because if he gave his opinion, it would become part of other people's arguments against SCOTUS, cheeto, and a bunch of cases. And he shouldn't do that, unfortunately. The fact he commented on Bush/Gore makes it pretty clear what hes likely to say today in a similar sleazy circumstance, though.

Big time!!!

Lll

Yep. Pathetic.

You just want your old hate group back fool...

Maybe there is a reason behind it. I have never been a big fan of Ronna but, somehow I believe she will spill the beans on the party. Let’s wait and see.

Entirely worthless!

Yeah she was pressing on issues she should not have pressed. Breyer loves to run his mouth and I love him for that but he's not gonna step out of line on this. Additionally he still hears cases occasionally on the 1st Circuit so he's technically active although he wont be hearing any politically charged cases most likely you just dont know. They should have hired an a reporter with a good legal background that understands this.

didn't think it was possible, but she's worse than Chuck Todd

And he won’t! He’s a man of ethics and it would be ethically irresponsible for him to speak publicly on any of the National Enquirer style gotcha questions she keeps throwing at him. She as unprofessional as it gets and is WAY out of her league in this interview when it comes to who she’s interviewing.

To sell his book, of course!

Blah blah blah...I am an irrelevant old white guy but wish I was still a Supreme.

Breyer has no ethics!

And to teach ethics to NBC's bosses regarding hiring Ronna McDaniel.

Absolutely. Talk in circles about what are clearly obvious political actions by the court.

AND,,,JUST WHY WOULD YOU THINK THAT,,,OL TRUMPER,,,YEA,,,ONCE AGAIN,,,YOU CAN’T HIDE FROM ME,,,/US,,,,WERE DEFINITELY,,WATCHING,,,EVERYTHING!!!!!

both of them garbage.

It’s encrypted you have to investigate the clues 🕵️ and then you have to check for legitimacy 🔬and then you have to not 👨‍⚖️ judge but discern and then you apply it to your personal goals and beliefs. It’s the only fair rules I can think of for all people playing The Game of Life!

He avoided putting his foot in his mouth, stepping on someone else's toes or influence peddling in a way that might compromise and already unpopular Supreme Court. The reporter knew she would be outfoxed (this isn't #45 after all) but pressed on anyway. As Justice Breyer noted, their objectives were at odds. He basically said, I'm not on the SC anymore and we will simply have to see how it plays out with the current players for these questions. Now that you know what I can and will answer, I'd be happy to respond.

The Supreme Courts job is not to make laws but the current trump court took that rule and threw it out the window. If this man were still on the court we wouldn't be talking about Roe.

Because it was free ad for his book.

he doesnt want to think for you.

certainly not in a 2 part special.

So you applaud him for getting out of bed just to be seen on tv, because interviewing him is pointless. He should have kept his ethics in the garden at home.

@@ClifftonCrowder-yt2gt I do not know the circumstances on which Justice Breyer agreed to the interview. He may have agreed to the interview to discuss his new book, and then the reporter took the interview in other directions. Judicial ethics prohibit a judge from speaking on a matter that is or will likely appear before the court. As a former Supreme Court Justice, Breyer knows that his comments on decisions of the Court since he left or about decisions that might appear before the Court will be used by the media as a tenth member of the court. In my opinion, Breyer was responsible to avoid providing his opinion on these matters. He did speak to the opinions he expressed in his book that were based on opinions he authored on the court. The fact that the reporter chose to air an interview where Breyer did not provide substantive opinions on so many matters is a decision of the media network. I do not blame Justice Breyer. I wish other Justices would avoid providing their opinions to the media on issues that might appear before the Court, like Justice Alito speaking about the 2020 election. I stand by my previous comment.

Totally. I certainly hope that the current court is the least ethical one that we'll ever see. Sad to think that there's an argument to be made that *Kavanaugh* isn't even among the three least ethical sitting justices.

He made a backdoor deal to protect his son. You are either a liar or uneducated.

@@Facetiously.EsotericYou’re just gullible

@@bizygirl1 You are poorly educated.

Her interview with Ronna McDaniel was the worst interview I've ever seen in my life!!

@@WalterDempsey-bj6utShe can add this to her ever-expanding repertoire of bad interviews!

Agreed! I find it painful to watch her anchor MTP. Please hire someone else

That's why Trump likes doing interviews with her.

she's actually worse than Chuck Todd, didn't think that was possible

YUP,,,THATS EXACTLY,,WHAT I’M THINKING,,,,

No doubt.😡

Bingo!!!

It was just revealed before the House by a minister that was part of a right wing ultra conservative Christian group that pandered to Supreme Court judges to get laws overturned. They knew the Hobby Lobby case determination before it was announced. He admitted Alito told him at a luncheon months before.

He sees the justice system the same way the bishops in Rome see the church. Unfortunately, those who conform to this way of thinking end up ironically aiding in society's collapse by not touching ground enough. Mind you, those of them reading this will likely take offense, but I'm not saying it as an insult, but as a fact obvious to everyone but themselves. It is a hard thing to see clearly and acknowledge flaws in ourselves, but worse to pretend we have none serious enough to even entertain, which is how some flaws, lamentably, never get corrected.

just a plug for a book. Doesn't have the same perks as Thomas.

He's acting like an 85 year old coy little boy who was just happy to be invited on tv...this was absurdly pointless

You're right and it's a fact that he is a former Justice and I am certain he knows and has learned more than we do. Maybe I am wrong too...

Like defining what is a woman

@@robertbirch5676 What is a woman?

@@jinxterpinxter Ask Richie Mandow

@@robertbirch5676 So you don’t know what a woman is?

@@jinxterpinxter if you're confused look between your legs

Yes he did answer Bush v Gore and the Alito leak.

The Senate was led by Schumer when he retired. Jackson took his place.

Do you think Breyer is so much wiser than those who wrote the constitution?

​@@gopher7691No, but atleast he was the Justice during the 21st century not the 19th century justice. Things do change, the connotations of the words or documents may change or differ.

@@dentenunique3908 no they don’t.

@@dentenunique3908 the means for adapting to current circumstances are legislatures, not unelected justices writing their policy preferences into the constitution

What was she supposed to do better?