Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

University of Michigan Law School

Michigan Law Review

Statutory interpretation

1988

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Interpreting Legislative Inaction, William N. Eskridge Jr. Oct 1988

Interpreting Legislative Inaction, William N. Eskridge Jr.

Michigan Law Review

This month the Supreme Court will hear reargument in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union on the question of whether section 1981 prohibits discrimination by private parties. In this article, Professor Eskridge addresses the issue of how legislative inaction should affect statutory interpretation. He begins by constructing a detailed analysis of the Court's legislative inaction cases, arguing that the case law is much more coherent than previous analysts have suggested. Professor Eskridge then considers Justice Scalia's critique of that case law and provides support for Justice Scalia's views by distinguishing actual and presumed legislative intent, arguing that, based on a conception …


Statutory Interpretation, Legislative Inaction, And Civil Rights, Daniel A. Farber Oct 1988

Statutory Interpretation, Legislative Inaction, And Civil Rights, Daniel A. Farber

Michigan Law Review

This month the Supreme Court will hear reargument in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union on the question of whether section 1981 prohibits discrimination by private parties. Professor Farber identifies three issues which lie at the heart of Patterson: Must statutes be construed to conform to the intent of the drafters? Does legislative inaction provide reliable guidance to interpreters of statutes? And should the nature of the claim at issue - here a claim of civil rights - influence the interpreters? On this last point, Professor Farber argues that public values must be relevant to statutory interpretation and that judges …


Updating Statutory Interpretation, T. Alexander Aleinikoff Oct 1988

Updating Statutory Interpretation, T. Alexander Aleinikoff

Michigan Law Review

This month the Supreme Court will hear reargument in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union on the question of whether section 1981 prohibits discrimination by private parties. Professor Aleinikoff examines in depth the first issue raised by Professor Farber. Using metaphors of the archeological and the nautical Professor Aleinikoff describes theories of originalism and their application to statutory interpretation. Concluding that there are nonoriginalist (or nonarcheological) elements implicit in these theories, he proceeds to consider how an explicitly nonoriginalist (or nautical) theory of interpretation might work He concludes by commenting on the application of such a theory to Patterson.


Timeliness Of Petitions For Judicial Review Under Section 106(A) Of The Immigration And Nationality Act, Marilyn Mann Apr 1988

Timeliness Of Petitions For Judicial Review Under Section 106(A) Of The Immigration And Nationality Act, Marilyn Mann

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that courts should adopt a "good faith approach" to the section 106 timeliness issue. This approach would be similar to that suggested by the District of Columbia and Second Circuits. Part I discusses the statute, the relevant regulations, and the history of Supreme Court interpretation of section 106. Part II reviews the various approaches to the timeliness question developed by the courts of appeals. Part III argues that although the statutory langμage and legislative history are ambiguous on the section 106(a) timeliness question, the good faith approach would best achieve the goals of section 106: judicial economy, …