[*] The Good Humor Man

So I was reading news on the web at lunch, and I came across this bit from Justice Stephen Breyer on how he decides SCOTUS cases. I want you to read this part carefully and try not to cry:

"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."

As examples of his own stress on consequences, Breyer pointed to two decisions last year involving the Ten Commandments.

He decided a display of the commandments in front of two Kentucky courthouses was unconstitutional because he concluded their display would cause religious conflict. But he found that removing a similar display that had been in front of the Texas State Capital for years would not, so he ruled it constitutional.

Think about that: the consequences of striking down a law (for example, that it would cause "religious conflict" to do so) should be considered in deciding if a law is constitutional.

I guess to the good humor man, the most important thing is to make the customer happy, so the ends must justify the means.