Stephen Breyer Officially Retires Tomorrow, Opening a Seat for Ketanji Brown Jackson
“My retirement from active service,” Breyer told the president, “will be effective on Thursday, June 30, 2022, at noon.”

Stephen Breyer wrote a letter today to President Joe Biden stating that he will officially retire tomorrow from his position as a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. "The Court has announced that tomorrow, beginning at 10 a.m., it will hand down all remaining opinions during this Term. Accordingly, my retirement from active service," Breyer told the president, "will be effective on Thursday, June 30, 2022, at noon." "It has been my great honor," Breyer wrote, "to participate as a judge in the effort to maintain our Constitution and the Rule of Law." Breyer's replacement, Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of his former clerks, has already been confirmed by the Senate, so we can expect her to start work at SCOTUS shortly.
Breyer was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1994 by President Bill Clinton, who said the justice-to-be would "strike the right balance between the need for discipline and order, being firm on law enforcement issues but really sticking in there for the Bill of Rights." "Alas," I wrote when Breyer first announced his impending retirement, "the former president proved only half right. Breyer was frequently 'firm' in his deference to the government. But that same deference often led Breyer to do the opposite of 'sticking in there for the Bill of Rights,' especially in major Fourth Amendment cases."
Jackson looks to be a more promising justice than Breyer on such crucial issues. Indeed, in her career as a lower court judge over the past decade, she has demonstrated admirable judgment in criminal justice cases. Criminal justice reform advocates are likely to be much happier with her record on the Supreme Court than they have been with Breyer's.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Luckily this is basically a no-op.
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join.
Check further details by reaching this link..>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
My entire working career I never once saw a diversity hire work out well.
Maybe this time.
What's Clarence Thomas, chopped liver?
"What's Clarence Thomas"
Are you trying to bait leftists into a stream of racial slurs?
Do they really need baiting?
Good point
I'll start as a non-Leftist
June 30, 2022 "a date which will live in infamy
A justice selected from a complete pool of candidates, without any specific discrimination.
So, no, not chopped liver.
(and as far as I can tell, he knows what a woman is)
And all the secrets of a woman's body to boot
>>What's Clarence Thomas
Bork Segunda
Biden didn't vote to confirm him, so he ain't black.
No, a complete asshole who bullies poor people, tries to strike down Affirmative Action without which he'd be in Pinhook Georgia, let's innocent people rot in jail in order to protect prosecutors, and is pussy whipped by his wing nut wife - or is she Trump in drag?
Are you trying to bait leftists into a stream of racial slurs?
I guess that's a yes.
I feel your pain, loser.
Face it bitch, you lost. And the Hulu man race is all the better for it.
I do not even consider the arguments of those who add random apostrophes, e.g., "let's".
He is G.O.A.T.
Jackson looks to be a more promising justice than Breyer on such crucial issues.
Ok, which of you fuckers wants to bookmark this for next term?
I'm passing, it's too easy.
she is a fucking stalinist, through and through. But so was Breyer...
So is Reason
You wouldn't know a Stalinist from the SC majority which just yanked basic rights from half the population you snowflake, but hey, in the name of states rights - except if it's about guns - you're fine with being told what to do.
Absolutely delicious, angry, hateful meltdown of the leftist who has lost - and will continue to lose.
Cry harder you pussy little bitch.
These helpful interjections needlessly breaking up a relatively short quote? Yeah, they're actually not that helpful, Damon. You also didn't need to close the quote and then open it again one character later to continue itself for 5 words before another interjection. Let's demonstrate:
Lashaun Breheny wrote a letter today to Damon Root explaining that his shitty writing style makes his quotations painful to read. "These helpful interjections", Breheny wrote, "needlessly breaking up a relatively short quote?" "Yeah, they're actually not that helpful", Beheny told Root. "You also didn't need to close the quote", Beheny stated, "and then open it again one character later to continue itself for 5 words before another interjection. "
Now let's try a different approach where we give an introduction and then use some text markup to set off the quotation:
Lashaun Breheny wrote a letter today to Damon Root explaining that his shitty writing style makes his quotations painful to read. Breheny wrote:
These helpful interjections needlessly breaking up a relatively short quote? Yeah, they're actually not that helpful, Damon. You also didn't need to close the quote and then open it again one character later to continue itself for 5 words before another interjection.
See how the quote is a lot easier to read, Damon Root, if you don't break it up every 5th word, senior editor, to add completely superfluous interjections, Mr. Root, that adds no commentary or explication, Damon, to the quoted text?
That tag was closed. I checked it twice. Fuck these Reason squirrels for covering for Damon by trying to make me look bad. /s
The second example should read:
Lashaun Breheny wrote a letter today to Damon Root explaining that his shitty writing style makes his quotations painful to read. Breheny wrote:
Of course, even without the intended blockquote markup, it's still easier to just read the fucking 3 sentence quotation without interrupting it and breaking up sentences needlessly. I'm guessing this chump gets paid by the word or something.
Apparently reason writers don't even have an edit button.
Stephen Breyer Officially Retires Tomorrow, Opening a Seat for someone whose gender he can't define, because he's not a biologist.
Vox, with all it's hard-won Millennial and Zoomer wisdom wants to get rid of the Supreme Court altogether. So...
Marbury *was* decided incorrectly.
Serious question: Was Jackson's nomination and confirmation unconstitutional or illegal if there was no seat open yet? If not, what is to stop the president with a compliant Senate from putting backup Justices in place for all the seats?
Was Jackson's nomination and confirmation unconstitutional or illegal if there was no seat open yet?
I don't think so. It seems to be all clear under the constitution. Is this unprecedented?
I'm not aware of it happening that far in advance. All of the ones that I can recall either (1) announced their retirement at the end of the term, during which time their replacement went through, or (2) died. I have not done an extensive review, but I'm not aware of a situation where a sitting Justice announced that he would retire six months in advance and then his replacement was nominated and confirmed before the seat was vacated.
It seems...off....
I looked up the Kavanaugh nomination timeline because it sounded similar to this one, but it was a bit different. Then, Kennedy announced retirement at around this time in 2018 (which I'm guessing was at the end or just after the term), his retirement was effective a few days later, and then Trump nominated Kavanaugh a few days after that, so in that case the vacancy already existed before the formal nomination.
As long as it's in the same SC session and for the specified seat it seems fine/fair to me. I can see the nomination being different for a different replacement and I wouldn't want a president picking for far off changes even if they were all in his presidency to create and avoid the Garland refusal.
Yeah, that's kinda what I'm concerned about, though. People think this was fine for all the reasons you stated, but . . . there wasn't an opening until today. The fact remains that a new Justice was nominated and confirmed without a vacancy existing. If that can be done, and it apparently has been done, I see nothing that would stop a President and Senate from doing the same thing farther out.
What if Breyer changed his mind? Until he actually steps down, he could. So then what happens to Jackson?
I think this is, as the kids put it, problematic.
Breyer's replacement, Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of his former clerks
I’m noticing a pattern.
And nothing of value was lost.
It is going to be hard to reinstate Roe with a justice who does not know what is a woman.
Thank you for sharing this good information!
good information
Remember those Action Jackson toys they had back in the 70's? Now we have Affirmative Action Jackson!
Time will tell if Ketanji Brown Jackson developed into a good justice or not. I like that she has experience as a public defender instead of the typical prosecutor experience.
Hopefully she will have more libertarian viewpoints instead of holding true to partisan Democrat positions.
I'm troubled that her position will forever be tainted by how Joe Biden undermined her. His stupidity by saying that we would only nominate a woman of color is a huge blunder. A better approach would be to have shut his virtue signaling trap and simply nominated her.
I find the honesty refreshing. The race and sex of literally every single justice was a factor in their nomination. It's better if we pretend otherwise?
Who do these Reason writers think they are?
Journalists.
Nope, couldn't do it with a straight face.
No, that jerk Senator Blackburn from the Tennessee hills is the biologist.
*editors
Jurinalists has a ring to it, some might say a tinkle
^Doesn't know what a woman is^
Its good to see you like this. May your impotent, ideological hate finally devour you, loser.