Reading Law The Interpretation Of Legal Texts Pdf

See a Problem

Reading Law The Interpretation of Legal Texts by Antonin Scalia

This, Posner suggests, hobbles legislatures and predisposes them toward smaller government. That which it meant when adopted it means now. Similarly, by this argument, if judges stray from the canons long enough, they will lose their legitimacy. The book Authors argue that judge-made common law gave coherence to the law when there were few statutes.

Also, the concept of originalism as well expounded by Antony Scalia and Bryan A. It would seem that his theological canons make him a target for some serious textual parsing.

Scalia and Garner s Reading Law The In

This book is fascinating, especially for a law junkie like me. The National Review's response to the Posner review.

Fair enough, but this always seemed to be tenuous ground to me. This is an intersting and thought provoking book. Scalia is first sitting justice since Story to write treatise on interpretation while on bench. Justice Scalia has once again embarked on a defense of textualism, the theory of interpretation that argues one must look back at the original text and stick to the text when deciding a case. This book is a must for lawyers.

Posner believes that Garner and Scalia are being obtuse if not disingenuous. Lay readers can read th How do you interpret the law? It suggests that there is real demand for this book, so I used some gift cards on it, and I wasn't disappointed. And, of course, the parol evidence rule is an important one that must be followed. Why is strict construction a bad thing?

It's one of those projects I picked up because of my enduring interest in the technicalities of the English language and because I'm a fan of Bryan A. Or is it a moral view, a religious one, a status quo one? Glad I read it, and I'll keep it handy to refer to, but I don't see it as definitive. The problem with these arguments is that they can be used to support opposing theories as well.

Others of these widely applying canons are more technical. Originalism unquestionably is. The rest of the book is a wonderful reference for lawyers. If you trade a gun for drugs, are you using a gun in a drug transaction? The authors generally devote only a few pages to each canon, which allows for easy pacing.

Scalia and Garner insist that meaning will come from other text in the statute. Authors argue that judge-made common law gave coherence to the law when there were few statutes.

Meanwhile, the book takes up some of the most controversial issues in modern jurisprudence. Scalia's explanation of what he thinks he ought to be doing when he interprets statutes.

Those principles are part of the bedrock of contract jurisprudence, and Garner and Scalia dismiss them with just a couple sentences and single citation to a secondary source in a footnote. They made me what I've become. As a Legislative Drafter, I found this book to be extremely useful. In this endeavor, the use of a respected English dictionary is helpful. What happens, though, when different parts of the country have different opinions about what is right?

Reading Law The Interpretation of Legal Texts

At the moment I am struggling to advocate for a living constitution, but I guess that just goes to show how convincing this book was. Lay readers can read the introduction and the section on fallacies to get a general idea of textualism. Nonoriginalism, by contrast, imposes on society statutory prescriptions that were never democratically adopted.

People look at you oddly when you're reading a book like this, metallica nothing else matters sheet music pdf and they look at you like you're out of your mind when you're reading a book like this and chuckling out loud. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Scalia and a lexicographer on scalia'a manner of reading law.

Scalia and Garner s Reading Law The Interpretation of Legal Texts

Second, the book makes numerous mentions of how these rules are, in large part, understood in the law-drafting community. As much about parsing the English language as about judicial principles. How do you interpret the law?

Very good excerpts on the false pretenses that are somewhat common beliefs. Again, a minority whose rights need protecting versus a moral view by different groups. Sometimes, social context can completely change phrases from having a connotation of strong condemnation to reverberations of high praise.

He is considered to be a core member of the conservative wing of the court, vigorously advancing textualism in statutory interpretation and originalism in constitutional interpretation. But how can judges reliably achieve this Herculean task when the English language presents so many difficulties of interpretation? This book collects in a single volume dozens of rules of interpretation for both statutes and contracts. Some of these rules apply to all legal texts.

Legal Solutions

The surplusage canon establishes that, if possible, every word of a legal text ought to be given its meaning. For example, the ordinary-meaning canon establishes that legal terms ought to be given their everyday meaning, the meaning which would be understood by a citizen who has to abide by them. The authors grapple with these and dozens of equally curious questions while explaining the most principled, lucid, and reliable techniques for deriving meaning from authoritative texts. Achieving this role crucially depends on judges fairly and accurately applying the text of the law rather than some perceived vision of the good or a more just society. Circuit and in the Nixon and Ford administrations, and teaching law at the Universities of Virginia and Chicago.