Instruct: Given a premise, retrieve a hypothesis that is entailed by the premise.
Query: Justice Breyer, under our theory as we've advanced it, you're right; the 1976 act would be unconstitutional. Whether this Court would apply such a holding in this case to that act is a question that would have to be resolved under the retrospective --
The 1976 act is deemed unconstitutional. 
The 1976 extension could be unconstitutional and off putting.
The 1976 extension could be unconstitutional and keep many people feeling in the dark.
This text regards a retrospectivity case.
The agent does not agree that the '76 act should have been declared void. 
The theory used by Justice Breyer is advanced. 
The 1976 act was not declared void
An act in 1976 can be either good or bad depending on how you look at it. 
This case and the '76 act are about the same thing.
The 1976 extension could be unconstitutional and cause chaos in the streets.
The Court cited Graham vs. Connor in considering the situation.
The First Amendment argument about retrospective extension has the strongest chance of being accepted.  
The First Amendment argument about retrospective extension is the strongest argument to alter the constitution. 
This court case will be deemed unconstitutional
Could we then go back to the impatient Justice O'Connor's question?
The statute was determined unconstitutional
Justice Breyer opinions were never clearly implied
People wonder if the 1988 Act is now obsolete.
People would go mad by trying to understand the 1976 extension.
Justice Breyer will be ok with the ruling
Could we then go back to the rude Justice O'Connor's question?
The question was based on the precedents 
This court case will be deemed unconstitutional
Justice Breyer will be ok with the ruling
1976 act is unconstitutional