Listen and read

Step into an infinite world of stories

  • Read and listen as much as you want
  • Over 950 000 titles
  • Exclusive titles + Storytel Originals
  • Easy to cancel anytime
Try now
image.devices-Singapore 2x

A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law - New Edition

Series

47 of 17

Language
English
Format
Category

Non-Fiction

We are all familiar with the image of the immensely clever judge who discerns the best rule of common law for the case at hand. According to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a judge like this can maneuver through earlier cases to achieve the desired aim—“distinguishing one prior case on his left, straight-arming another one on his right, high-stepping away from another precedent about to tackle him from the rear, until (bravo!) he reaches the goal—good law." But is this common-law mindset, which is appropriate in its place, suitable also in statutory and constitutional interpretation? In a witty and trenchant essay, Justice Scalia answers this question with a resounding negative.

In exploring the neglected art of statutory interpretation, Scalia urges that judges resist the temptation to use legislative intention and legislative history. In his view, it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what the judges think the lawgivers meant rather than by what the legislature actually promulgated. Eschewing the judicial lawmaking that is the essence of common law, judges should interpret statutes and regulations by focusing on the text itself. Scalia then extends this principle to constitutional law. He proposes that we abandon the notion of an everchanging Constitution and pay attention to the Constitution's original meaning. Although not subscribing to the “strict constructionism” that would prevent applying the Constitution to modern circumstances, Scalia emphatically rejects the idea that judges can properly “smuggle” in new rights or deny old rights by using the Due Process Clause, for instance. In fact, such judicial discretion might lead to the destruction of the Bill of Rights if a majority of the judges ever wished to reach that most undesirable of goals.

This essay is followed by four commentaries by Professors Gordon Wood, Laurence Tribe, Mary Ann Glendon, and Ronald Dworkin, who engage Justice Scalia’s ideas about judicial interpretation from varying standpoints. In the spirit of debate, Justice Scalia responds to these critics.

Featuring a new foreword that discusses Scalia’s impact, jurisprudence, and legacy, this witty and trenchant exchange illuminates the brilliance of one of the most influential legal minds of our time.

© 2018 Princeton University Press (Ebook): 9781400882953

Release date

Ebook: 30 January 2018

Others also enjoyed ...

Features:

  • Over 950 000 titles

  • Kids Mode (child safe environment)

  • Download books for offline access

  • Cancel anytime

Most popular

Unlimited

For those who want to listen and read without limits.

S$12.98 /month
3 days for free
  • 1 account

  • Unlimited Access

  • Unlimited listening

  • Cancel anytime

Try now

Unlimited Bi-yearly

For those who want to listen and read without limits.

S$69 /6 months
14 days for free
Save 11%
  • 1 account

  • Unlimited Access

  • Unlimited listening

  • Cancel anytime

Try now

Unlimited Yearly

For those who want to listen and read without limits.

S$119 /year
14 days for free
Save 24%
  • 1 account

  • Unlimited Access

  • Unlimited listening

  • Cancel anytime

Try now

Family

For those who want to share stories with family and friends.

From S$14.90/month
  • 2-3 accounts

  • Unlimited Access

  • Unlimited listening

  • Cancel anytime

2 accounts

S$14.90 /month
Try now