Quote

When I went to law school, which after all was back in the dark ages, we never looked beyond our borders for precedents. As a state court judge, it never would have occurred to me to do so, and when I got to the Supreme Court, it was very much the same. We just didn't do it.

We live in an era with no historical precedents. History is no longer useful as a tool in helping us understand current changes.

I missed a lot of decisions. At the time of making such a decision, there was no doubt in my mind as to its correctness. However, a second or two later I felt that I erred and wished I could change my original ruling.

I don't seem to be able to learn from experience or anything useful. History doesn't help me. Precedents don't inform my experience.

Every bad precedent originated as a justifiable measure.

One precedent creates another and they soon accumulate and constitute law. What yesterday was a fact, today is doctrine.

One of the things that has really hit home for me is that the world is how we decide it is going to be. Very few things just happen. They grow out of history, and they grow out of the present, and the more we can get a sense of how our actions lead into other actions in the future, hopefully we'll learn to make better decisions.

I've become very fond of the law. I've always been an advocate for justice, which occasionally the law brings to light.

I've long favored smart judicial-selection reform - every member of my court does - and every legislative session, reform measures are filed... and then they fail.

The value of a decision as a precedent is very much enhanced by the care with which it has been considered, and if the opinion itself shows that other decisions of the same court, or of other courts upon the same point, have been reviewed and examined, it adds to the value of the decision made on each consideration.