Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer gave an insider's view of the day-to-day workings of the United States' highest court on Friday at the Harvard Law School.

Audience members packed the aisles and spilled over into the hallway outside the Vorenberg room to hear Breyer, a 1964 HLS graduate and former faculty member, give the last Saturday School lecture of the millennium.

Breyer, who was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1980 and then to the Supreme Court in 1994 as President Clinton's second appointee, reminded his listeners of the Supreme Court's role within the judicial system.

"The first thing you forget when you read the newspapers is that almost all law in the United States is state law," he said. "If you want to make a difference in people's lives, please don't all run to Washington."

Contrary to common belief, the true power of the court lies in its finality and ability to create legal conformity across the nation, Breyer said.

"As we see it, our job primarily is to decide cases of federal law where there is need for a national uniform rule," Breyer said. "That is what we can do that others can't."

Breyer went on to describe the process of the Supreme Court itself and his role within it. Of the approximately 7,500 cases that arrive at the Court each year, the justices will hear only around 100.An important part of the work of the court lies in deciding which cases are worthy enough to merit a hearing.

However, Breyer said, it is hard to go wrong in denying a case. "The issue either comes back in another case or it doesn't," he said. "And if it was an important issue that we should have decided, it will be back."

After the court decides to rule on a case, the justices hear arguments, hold discussion conferences and write decisions.

However, the Supreme Court's discussion of cases is unique, according to Breyer, because the court considers the principles behind a case as well as the particular details and arguments.

During conferences all nine justices sit around a table to discuss. "My job as the junior justice is if somebody knocks on the door, I open it," Breyer quipped.

And although the justices have varying beliefs and political stances, Breyer insisted that the process was very cordial and professional.

"In five years, I have never once heard a voice raised in anger," he said. "I have never once heard any member of our court, in total privacy, make a slighting remark, even a joke...about another member of the court."

Once the court comes to a decision, different justices are assigned to write up the majority and minority opinions. Writing opinions, Breyer said, takes up most of a justice's time.

"Most of the job is sitting at a word processor," Breyer said. "It is glamorous, but it's glamorous in the sense of sitting at that word processor."

The nature of the judicial process makes it different than any other branch of government, Breyer said, because almost all that goes on behind the scenes is evident in the written decisions of the justices.

"The 'behind-the-scenes' in a legislature has to be interesting," Breyer said. "It has to be a story of how those words got there, what they mean and what their purpose is. When our court is working well, or any appellate court, the answers are right in the opinion."

According to Breyer, there is no mystery behind the finished opinions.

"What really happens at that word processor? Well, the same thing that happens when you're writing your first draft," he said. "Is that really an interesting story? It is for you, it is for your mother possibly. But it's only of mild interest to many of us. But that's the kind of thing that goes on in the court."

During the question-and-answer portion of his lecture, Breyer expressed an optimistic view of the future of the United States judicial system. "This country has survived a lot," he said. "Despite the errors over the past 200 years, you have a system which solves such serious problems in so peaceful a way."

The court's efficiency and ability to put the past in its proper perspective has made it successful, Breyer said.

"Discuss it, decide it, over and done," he said of the court's decision making process. "Tomorrow is a new day."