Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-1011_mkhn.pdf
Page Number: 36.0

Cite as:  586 U. S. ____ (2019) 

17 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

tion as one way both to diminish the risk of conflict and to
promote  economic  development  and  commercial  prosper- 
ity.  Congress  at  that  time  and  at  the  request  of  many  of 
those  organizations  enacted  the  Immunities  Act.  Given 
the  differences  between  international  organizations  and 
nation states, along with the Act’s purposes and the risk of
untoward consequences, I would leave the Immunities Act 
where  we  found  it—as  providing  for  immunity  in  both
commercial and noncommercial suits. 

My decision rests primarily not upon linguistic analysis,
but  upon  basic  statutory  purposes.    Linguistic  methods 
alone, however artfully employed, too often can be used to
justify  opposite  conclusions.    Purposes,  derived  from  con-
text,  informed  by  history,  and  tested  by  recognition  of 
related  consequences,  will  more  often  lead  us  to  legally
sound, workable interpretations—as they have consistently 
done  in  the  past.  These  methods  of  interpretation  can 
help  voters  hold  officials  accountable  for  their  decisions 
and  permit  citizens  of  our  diverse  democracy  to  live  to-
gether  productively  and  in  peace—basic  objectives  in 
America of the rule of law itself. 

With respect, I dissent.