Breyer talked about other differences in how the justices make decisions, saying they can consult six basic criteria in assessing a law: the language of the law, the history of the text, tradition behind the text, precedents, the purpose of the law and the consequences of letting the law stand or striking it down. "I tend to emphasize purpose and consequences," said Breyer, who was nominated for the high court by President Clinton. "Others emphasize language, a more literal reading of the text, history and tradition — believing that those help you reach a more objective answer."

Legislators are the ones who are supposed to consider the consequences of law, not the Supreme Court. At least Breyer admitted that his decisions will always, right or wrong, be poorly based. However, if this is going to continue then we should be able to elect our Supreme Court justices. Breyer is, in fact, political by nature.