Justice Breyer Hints At Retirement Plans: Not Going ‘To Stay There Till I Die’

[Franklin Pierce]

The 83-year-old said in a new interview that he is struggling to decide when he should step down from the Supreme Court.

Justice Stephen Breyer is struggling to determine when he should retire from his seat on the Supreme Court and is weighing the idea of who would pick his successor, according to The New York Times.

“I don’t think I’m going to stay there till I die — hope not,” Breyer told the newspaper in an interview to discuss his new book.


The 83-year-old justice said he “inevitably” has to think about who might take his place, recalling a quote from Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February 2016.

“He said, ‘I don’t want somebody appointed who will just reverse everything I’ve done for the last 25 years,’” Breyer recollected. He also agreed with a quote from former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who said that deciding when to retire was not “a judicial act” and therefore it was not inappropriate to weigh the politics of the sitting president.

Justice Breyer Hints At Retirement Plans: Not Going 'To Stay There Till I Die' | HuffPost

 

[Hunerwadel]

The 83-year-old said in a new interview that he is struggling to decide when he should step down from the Supreme Court.

Justice Stephen Breyer is struggling to determine when he should retire from his seat on the Supreme Court and is weighing the idea of who would pick his successor, according to The New York Times.

“I don’t think I’m going to stay there till I die — hope not,” Breyer told the newspaper in an interview to discuss his new book.


The 83-year-old justice said he “inevitably” has to think about who might take his place, recalling a quote from Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February 2016.

“He said, ‘I don’t want somebody appointed who will just reverse everything I’ve done for the last 25 years,’” Breyer recollected. He also agreed with a quote from former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who said that deciding when to retire was not “a judicial act” and therefore it was not inappropriate to weigh the politics of the sitting president.

Justice Breyer Hints At Retirement Plans: Not Going 'To Stay There Till I Die' | HuffPost

He doesn't know that for sure.

 

[BowlBrother85]

He said, ‘I don’t want somebody appointed who will just reverse everything I’ve done for the last 25 years,’” Breyer recollected.

This is the first time I've seen him openly discuss the potential ramifications of not stepping down while his seat can be filled by a Democratic Party President, and confirmed by a Democratic Party-controlled Senate. It's at least progress, but if there is one thing we've learned that all Supreme Court Justices have in common... they love being on the high court and they want to stay on it as long as they possibly can.

 

[hog88]

This is the first time I've seen him openly discuss the potential ramifications of not stepping down while his seat can be filled by a Democratic Party President, and confirmed by a Democratic Party-controlled Senate. It's at least progress, but if there is one thing we've learned that all Supreme Court Justices have in common... they love being on the high court and they want to stay on it as long as they possibly can.

It’s not progress, it’s proof federal judges are partisan and lifetime appointments need to end.

 

[BowlBrother85]

It’s not progress, it’s proof federal judges are partisan and lifetime appointments need to end.

That needed more proof? Not only are they partisan, increasingly, they more closely resemble career politicians than they do judges.

 

[hog88]

That needed more proof? Not only are they partisan, increasingly, they more closely resemble career politicians than they do judges.

No **** Sherlock. The federal judiciary needs to be bulldozed and rebuilt.

 

[BP4Prez]

Why do these justices even won’t to work this long?

 

[Tyler Durden]

Why do these justices even won’t to work this long?

Power, influence, getting your ass kissed everywhere you go, a heightened sense of self importance.

 

[hog88]

Why do these justices even won’t to work this long?

Hubris, prestige and $$$.

Really, who was the last Supreme that retired at an age to enjoy their life’s work? Sandy Baby?

Let’s see who gets that reference.

 

[BP4Prez]

Power, influence, getting your ass kissed everywhere you go, a heightened sense of self importance.

I just don’t get it. I’m 30 and would love to retire tomorrow.

 

[Tyler Durden]

I just don’t get it. I’m 30 and would love to retire tomorrow.

I don't really have an issue with them being super old, but I do think once they start having health issues they should retire. I'd assume most of them want to hold on for as long as possible and then hope that a president with a similar ideology is in office when they go. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

 

[TNVOLNAVY]

It should be a hoot watching the clown show should Slo Jo get to nominate a judge. It will be “Beauty Contest” between all the oppressed marginalized groups to get their pick.

 

[Wireless1]

This is the first time I've seen him openly discuss the potential ramifications of not stepping down while his seat can be filled by a Democratic Party President, and confirmed by a Democratic Party-controlled Senate. It's at least progress, but if there is one thing we've learned that all Supreme Court Justices have in common... they love being on the high court and they want to stay on it as long as they possibly can.

So true, so true, but with what gone on over the last 10 years you don’t want the other branches to be involved in when they go

 

[hog88]

I don't really have an issue with them being super old, but I do think once they start having health issues they should retire. I'd assume most of them want to hold on for as long as possible and then hope that a president with a similar ideology is in office when they go. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

That’s not the way it’s supposed to work.

End lifetime appointments! Nobody in this day and age should have a guaranteed job for life regardless of their ability to preform that job.

 

[BreatheUT]

The 83-year-old said in a new interview that he is struggling to decide when he should step down from the Supreme Court.

Justice Stephen Breyer is struggling to determine when he should retire from his seat on the Supreme Court and is weighing the idea of who would pick his successor, according to The New York Times.

“I don’t think I’m going to stay there till I die — hope not,” Breyer told the newspaper in an interview to discuss his new book.


The 83-year-old justice said he “inevitably” has to think about who might take his place, recalling a quote from Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February 2016.

“He said, ‘I don’t want somebody appointed who will just reverse everything I’ve done for the last 25 years,’” Breyer recollected. He also agreed with a quote from former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who said that deciding when to retire was not “a judicial act” and therefore it was not inappropriate to weigh the politics of the sitting president.

Justice Breyer Hints At Retirement Plans: Not Going 'To Stay There Till I Die' | HuffPost

My guess is he's been threatened because the dim's expect to lose the WH in 2024.

 

[hog88]

My guess is he's been threatened because the dim's expect to lose the WH in 2024.

You damn well he has.

 

[Franklin Pierce]

Article 3 Section 1 U.S. Constitution:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Did the Founding Fathers make a mistake?

 

[Franklin Pierce]

My guess is he's been threatened because the dim's expect to lose the WH in 2024.

Keep in the back of your mind that Breyer has a book coming out, so his statements about retirement may help his book sales.

 

[hog88]

Article 3 Section 1 U.S. Constitution:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Did the Founding Fathers make a mistake?

Yes they made a mistake but in their defense they didn’t think anyone would stay in the job more than 10-15 years.

 

[hog88]

Keep in the back of your mind that Breyer has a book coming out, so his statements about retirement may help his book sales.

Book deals for .gov people are nothing more than bribes. WTF wants to read this guys book?

 

[Weezer]

Yes they made a mistake but in their defense they didn’t think anyone would stay in the job more than 10-15 years.

Life expectancy was a lot shorter back then.

 

[hog88]

Life expectancy was a lot shorter back then.

That and there wasn’t any money in public service back then. Now they make money outside of their .gov salary.

 

[NurseGoodVol]

Hubris, prestige and $$$.

Really, who was the last Supreme that retired at an age to enjoy their life’s work? Sandy Baby?

Let’s see who gets that reference.

Sandra O Connor.

 

[Weezer]

Seems like he might wanna retire soon while the Dems have control of Congress. Between inflation, the Delta variant, and Afghanistan, I think it very possible, even likely, that the GOP gets control of Congress at the midterms. If that happens, they could hamstring the process again, just like they did with Garland. That would lead to a lot of pissed off Dems.

 

[Orangeburst]

Trump's Supreme Court just showed why court-packing is necessary to save U.S. democracy (msn.com)

What a dipzoid:

People who criticize calls for court-packing say that the problem is Republicans will retaliate and add more justices themselves, next time they have power. What's your answer to that?

Well, I think the politics of the situation is that you can't have court-packing, unless you have control.

Democrats have control of the House, the Senate and the White House. If there's protection of voting rights that the Supreme Court would not strike down, then I don't think the Republicans, as currently constituted, could sweep the House, the Senate and the White House. The Republicans exercise outsized power right now, because of gerrymandering, because of the electoral power. But in 7 out of the last 8 presidential elections, the Democrat has won the popular vote. The Republican party would not have the popularity to sweep and implement court-packing. When the Republican party might actually sweep, it won't be the same Republican party that we have today.