Changes

On issues of religion, Justice Breyer is the least [[liberal]] of the four-Justice [[liberal]] voting bloc on the Court, which also includes Justices [[John Paul Stevens]], [[David Souter]] and [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]], and former Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. Justice Breyer broke with that voting bloc to provide the pivotal fifth vote to allow the [[Texas]] government to maintain a monument to the [[Ten Commandments]] on its capitol grounds in [[Van Orden v. Perry]].

On issues of religion, Justice Breyer is the least [[liberal]] of the four-Justice [[liberal]] voting bloc on the Court, which also includes Justices [[John Paul Stevens]], [[David Souter]] and [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]], and former Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. Justice Breyer broke with that voting bloc to provide the pivotal fifth vote to allow the [[Texas]] government to maintain a monument to the [[Ten Commandments]] on its capitol grounds in [[Van Orden v. Perry]].

But on the issue of [[stare decisis]], Justice Breyer is leading the defense against [[liberal]] precedents vulnerable to being overturned by the [[Roberts Court]]. The most prominent target among the precedents is [[Roe v. Wade]], but many other lesser-known precedents were quickly overturned in the 2006-2007 sitting of the [[Roberts Court]]. This led Justice Breyer to declare on the last day of the term, perhaps in exasperation, "What has happened to stare decisis?"<ref>''Parents Involved in Cmty. Schs. v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1'' (2007) (Breyer, J., dissenting)</ref>  Justice Breyer dissented, on the grounds of [[stare decisis]], from 2007 decisions in:

But on the issue of [[stare decisis]], Justice Breyer is leading the defense against [[liberal]] precedents vulnerable to being overturned by the [[Roberts Court]]. The most prominent target among the precedents is [[Roe v. Wade]], but many other lesser-known precedents were quickly overturned in the 2006-2007 sitting of the [[Roberts Court]]. This led Justice Breyer to declare on the last day of the term, perhaps in exasperation, "What has happened to stare decisis?"<ref>''[[Parents Involved in Cmty. Schs. v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1]]'' (2007) (Breyer, J., dissenting)</ref>  Justice Breyer dissented, on the grounds of [[stare decisis]], from 2007 decisions in:

*''[[Leegin Creative Leather Prods. v. PSKS, Inc.]]''

*''[[Leegin Creative Leather Prods. v. PSKS, Inc.]]''

*''[[FEC v. Wis. Right to Life, Inc.]]'' (joining Justice Souter's dissent)

*''[[FEC v. Wis. Right to Life, Inc.]]'' (joining Justice Souter's dissent)

According to Senator [[Arlen Specter]], he had a chance encounter with Justice Breyer at a summer meeting after the end of the 2006-2007 term, and Specter publicly stated that Justice Breyer told him there were "eight" decisions in which the [[Roberts Court]] had overruled precedent.<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5099.html</ref>  Specter then publicly said he was going to review the testimony provided by nominees Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] and Justice [[Sam Alito]] to the Senate Judiciary Committee to see if they were abiding by it.

According to Senator [[Arlen Specter]], he had a chance encounter with Justice Breyer at a summer meeting after the end of the 2006-2007 term, and Specter publicly stated that Justice Breyer told him there were "eight" decisions in which the [[Roberts Court]] had overruled precedent.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5099.html Specter to probe Supreme Court decisions], [[Politico]]</ref>  Specter then publicly said he was going to review the testimony provided by nominees Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] and Justice [[Sam Alito]] to the Senate Judiciary Committee to see if they were abiding by it.

On the issue of continued advisory use of the controversial [[Sentencing Guidelines]], Justice Breyer voted for preserving rather than invalidating them.

On the issue of continued advisory use of the controversial [[Sentencing Guidelines]], Justice Breyer voted for preserving rather than invalidating them.