On Tuesday, Stephen Breyer, an associate justice of the Supreme Court since 1994, gave a rare public lecture at Harvard Law School, warning that the authority of the highest court in the land depended on "a trust that the court is guided by legal principle, not politics".
Breyer is one of three liberal justices left on the court after President Donald Trump filled three vacancies in four years and gave the court a 6-3 hard-right majority. The aim of his address — named in honor of his late conservative colleague Justice Antonin Scalia — was to "make those whose initial instincts may favor important structural change or other similar institutional change, such as forms of 'court-packing', think long and hard before they embody those changes in law".
"If the public sees judges as politicians in robes", Breyer argued, "its confidence in the courts, and in the rule of law itself, can only diminish, diminishing the court's power, including its power to act as a check on other branches".
Seriously? It's hard to pick which words in that statement I find the most naive, misguided and self-serving.
...
Yet, as The Washington Post noted, "Breyer gave no hint in his speech about whether he is considering stepping down".
This, to quote Campos, is a "grave mistake". Politics aside, if Breyer is truly concerned about the Supreme Court's losing the trust and confidence of the people, what does he think a 7-2 conservative-led court, delivering partisan decision after partisan decision, out of step with public opinion, will look like to the average American? What confidence will it command? What credibility will it have?
So ... if you've need of a hanger for your robe, Mr. Justice, do let me know.
