Law Commons^™

Textualism's Failures: A Study Of Overruled Bankruptcy Decisions, Daniel J. Bussel

Vanderbilt Law Review

Judges and legal scholars are engaged in a contentious, wide- ranging, and long-running debate over methods of statutory interpretation. Stripping the debate of some of its nuance without misrepresenting its essence, there are two camps: the "textualists" and the "pragmatists." Cass Sunstein recently argued that the question of interpretive method should be considered in light of evidence whether textualist methods work better or worse than pragmatic ones. To date, however, only limited empirical evidence has been systematically brought to bear on this question.

This Article presents new empirical evidence gleaned from twenty years of interpretation of the United States Bankruptcy …

The New Textualism And The Rule Of Law Subtext In The Supreme Court's Bankruptcy Jurisprudence, Alan Schwartz

NYLS Law Review

The Supreme Court is thought to use a method of statutory interpretation called "the new textualism" when construing Federal Statutes, including the Bankruptcy Code. The new textualism, in brief, ties interpreters more closely to the text than more traditional interpretative methods. This Essay inquires into the justifications for the new textualism, but its primary goal is to argue that the Court prefers an important justification of this interpretative method to the method itself. The justification holds that interpretation should advance the rule of law virtues of certainty and predictability. A court that is committed to the new textualism would construe …

The Reconceptualization Of Legislative History In The Supreme Court, Charles Tiefer

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1995, the Supreme Court began to embrace a approach to interpreting Congressional intent. From that year forward, the Breyers-Stevens model of legislative history, or "institutional legislative history," has seen significant success, emerging in the shadows of the success Justice Scalia's enjoyed while promoting his brand of textualism in the early 1990s. In developing a new way to view Congressional intent, Justices Breyers and Stevens synthesize information gathered from congressional report details, preferably attached to bill drafting choices, thereby renouncing Scalia's reliance on the purposes espoused by the Congressional majority. This new approach, the author contends, rejuvenated the court's approach …