Via the AP: Breyer Says ‘Zero’ Politics on the Court

He said, however, that he hadn’t detected any split on the high court along Republican and Democratic ideological lines.

“I haven’t seen that kind of politics in the Supreme Court. Zero. It doesn’t exist,” he said.

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.”

All very interesting and points to the fact that probably the single most salient fact about a give court nominee is the way that person understands and applied legal interpretation, not their personal politics.

And also why a nominee like Harriet Miers is a terrible idea, as such a person almost certainly lacks any thoughts towards legal interpretation, and would therefore be more prone to wholly political actions on the bench.