Here's Justice Breyer with more on that.
>> And therefore I look quite a lot to purposes or values and consequences and
the danger of my approach, which you've just heard iterated is that I
would substitute my view of what's good for what the constitution is about.
So I have to take care not to do that.
So I write down my reasons very carefully so others can criticize and
amazingly enough they do criticize.
And the danger the other way is in my view.
We separate the law and the constitution from life.
Too rigid, it's got to be, if it's going to be lived for
a thousand years brought down to the life of people today, which means you
have to look how these values are applied to today's circumstances.
>> That's vague and it's not all that convincing I think.
But if you ask what the Supreme Court has done,
the answer is that it seems to have followed the evolutionary theory.