The importance of public debate about scientific issues could be seen in 1996 when the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of physician-assisted suicide, Breyer said.

"The relevant public policy issues, including our decision's likely social impact, had already been previously debated at length, in various public forums," he said. "In such cases, our Court rides the coattails of an existing public debate."

But Breyer said he fears that developments in genetics have not yet been subject to the public discussion needed to ensure sound decisions.

He highlighted three still-unexamined areas: DNA's role in the criminal process, the ability of DNA to predict predisposition to certain medical conditions and the application of patent laws to genetic research.

"[The] patent law approach is a one-size-fits-all approach. The question is, does it fit to the world of genetic research?" Breyer said.

He said that the crux of patent law is deciding whether a discovery "amounts to a protectable invention or useful device." In the case of genetic research, scientists sometimes apply when they have discovered "an existing aspect of nature" in which case a patent would not apply.

But despite of all the implications and difficult questions associated with genetic research, the benefits far outweigh the risks, Breyer said.