Document Type
Book Review
Abstract
Courts often face difficult questions of statutory interpretation and constitutional interpretation. Various judges take different approaches. This essay reviews the book, Reading the Constitution, Why I Chose Pragmatism Not Textualism, authored by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, who used methods that were often in the Court minority. Justice Breyer argued in favor of relying on purpose in federal statutory interpretation cases, and in favor of pragmatic balancing in federal constitutional cases. He was anti-formalistic and therefore generally opposed to textualism or originalism. The essay argues that this trade publication, intended for a general audience, has strengths and weaknesses stemming from the conflation of statutory and constitutional analysis, but overall has value in proposing a serious approach to pragmatic constitutional interpretation.
Recommended Citation
Mark S. Kende, Book Review: Justice Breyer's Problematic Pragmatism, 18 ConLawNOW 9 (2026)