Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts

Reading Law The Interpretation of Legal Texts In this groundbreaking book Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional statutory and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative styl

  • Title: Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts
  • Author: Antonin Scalia Bryan A. Garner
  • ISBN: 9780314275554
  • Page: 367
  • Format: Hardcover
  • In this groundbreaking book, Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional, statutory, and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative style with hundreds of illustrations from actual cases Is a burrito a sandwich Is a corporation entitled to personal privacy If you trade a gun for drugs, are you using a gun iIn this groundbreaking book, Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional, statutory, and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative style with hundreds of illustrations from actual cases Is a burrito a sandwich Is a corporation entitled to personal privacy If you trade a gun for drugs, are you using a gun in a drug transaction 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 Meanwhile, the book takes up some of the most controversial issues in modern jurisprudence What, exactly, is textualism Why is strict construction a bad thing What is the true doctrine of originalism And which is important the spirit of the law, or the letter The authors write with a well argued point of view that is definitive yet nuanced, straightforward yet sophisticated.

    University of Reading Discover the University of Reading, a global university that enjoys a world class reputation for teaching, research and enterprise. Reading Borough Council Reading Borough Council reading Dizionario inglese italiano WordReference reading Traduzione del vocabolo e dei suoi composti, e discussioni del forum. Legal Dictionary Law ALM s Law online Real Life Dictionary of the Law The easiest to read, most user friendly guide to legal terms Use it free Your Miranda Rights Show Me the Law Tell Attorney General Holder to Keep His Hands Off the Miranda Rule In the wake of the attempted bombing in Times Square in May as after other terrorism attempts there have been misguided calls to weaken our constitutional rights, including a call to loosen the Miranda rule. Poe s law Poe s law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author s intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of the parodied views The original statement, by Nathan Poe, read Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly Thomas G Heintzman and Construction Law Canada This website is intended to encourage discussion about recent developments in construction law in Canada The commentary in this website will relate to legislation and case law. Overview of Trademark Law Harvard University Overview of Trademark Law What is a trademark What sources of law govern trademarks What prerequisites must a mark satisfy in order to serve as a trademark Reading, Pennsylvania PA profile population, maps, real Estimated per capita income in , it was , in Reading city income, earnings, and wages data Estimated median house or condo value in , it was , in WebAssign Online homework and grading tools for instructors and students that reinforce student learning through practice and instant feedback.

    • [PDF] ↠ Free Read ☆ Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts : by Antonin Scalia Bryan A. Garner Ë
      367 Antonin Scalia Bryan A. Garner
    • thumbnail Title: [PDF] ↠ Free Read ☆ Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts : by Antonin Scalia Bryan A. Garner Ë
      Posted by:Antonin Scalia Bryan A. Garner
      Published :2018-09-11T01:47:05+00:00

    1 thought on “Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts”

    1. 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. There is an enlightening debate between Judge Richard Posner and the book's co-author, Bryan Garner in the pages of The New Republic (see cites below,) which spilled over into several online blogs including the National Review Online.All of us seek objectivity from the courts. That justices would want to ba [...]

    2. I read this to prepare myself for my master's program in law since I have little academic background in law. Like with nearly everything else that professes to share the 'truth' of anything, this book ought to be taken with a grain of salt. He seems to be cherry picking when to be a "strict textualist". Overall though this will be a great resource in my school career, written perfectly for direct quotes and paraphrasing

    3. As a Legislative Drafter, I found this book to be extremely useful. Previously, I had superficial knowledge on canons of interpretation. Also, the concept of originalism as well expounded by Antony Scalia and Bryan A. Garner is now seared into my mind. Like any other academic book, I will read and re-read this book so many times.

    4. This book is fascinating, especially for a law junkie like me. I now understand what Scalia was trying to do. The problem isn't with the Supreme Court; the problem is that the legislature isn't writing good laws and isn't writing needed laws to cover our changing society. It isn't the job of the Supreme Court or any court to legislate. What happens, though, when different parts of the country have different opinions about what is right? How can minority rights be protected? Thank goodness we hav [...]

    5. How to be Textualist“Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the judge, always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the legislature; or, in other words, to the will of the law.” –Chief Justice John Marshall“‘Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings.” –Led ZeppelinWords are slippery things. The same word can be used to designate almost an infinite number of meanings. I am running in the race. I am running for public office [...]

    6. Great introduction. Read this book before law school, and it provided a framework that I was able to use during law school to not only understand the Constitution, but also interpret law generally.

    7. I've had this on my "to read" shelf since 2012, when it came out, but was always put off by the price. Five years later, I still never see a used copy available for less than $40. It suggests that there is real demand for this book, so I used some gift cards on it, and I wasn't disappointed.This is mostly a textbook you could use in a linguistics class that was focused on semantics. Scalia and Garner argue that when we talk about the judiciary as "interpreting the law," we are really talking abo [...]

    8. This book I read over a period of several months, putting it down for several months in the middle, and then surging to a finish the last week or two. 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. Garner in particular, who mentioned the book in the published version of his interview with David Foster Wallace.I'm not a lawyer. Most of what I know about law before reading this book I learned fr [...]

    9. This book collects in a single volume dozens of rules of interpretation for both statutes and contracts. Because it is written by Bryan Garner (the current authority on clear and compelling legal writing) and Justice Antonin Scalia (hands down, the author of the most entertaining Supreme Court opinions), the book is very readable. I agree with almost every point that is made in this book. The only thing I disagree with -- and my disagreement is quite strong -- is that the goal of interpretation, [...]

    10. At first, I thought this would be an elaborate attempt to taunt the illiterate, something on the order of, "we made you a self help book on how to read." I was quite happy to find in it an exposition on a close reading approach to legal statute. The authors looked to compile methods on resolving textual ambiguity, and, despite there being some controversy over time about how to do so in certain cases, largely give some concept of how judges and courts might do so without looking beyond statutory [...]

    11. Authors argue that judge-made common law gave coherence to the law when there were few statutes. Now that democratically enacted ordinances, statutes, and rules abound, "the judge's principal function is to give those texts their fair meaning." A fair readings of the words of a statute should give those words the meaning "they conveyed to reasonable people at the time they were written." The book then sets out the plethora of "rules" for reading statutes that lawyers and judges rely on. The book [...]

    12. Reading Law is a very engaging and well written book, even if I, unsurprisingly, did not agree with all the authors' conclusions. The authors generally devote only a few pages to each canon, which allows for easy pacing. Although legal knowledge is not required to understand the book, the authors clearly assume that the reader has some familiarity with the law and do not explain a substantial number of the common law legal principles mentioned in the book. While its excoriation of purposivism do [...]

    13. How do you interpret the law? Well, by reading the text and interpreting its words according to how they were understood when the law was created. This sounds rather obvious, but sadly it is not in American constitutional law. Scalia and Garner lay out their textualist philosophy with seventy 'canons' of interpretation. Many of these are rather technical (e.g. the 'eiusdem generis' canon), but I find it pleasing that at least some lawyers still treat the law as a science. Lay readers can read th [...]

    14. This is an intersting and thought provoking book. In a sense, it's a subterfuge. There are so many rules, and those rules are so contradictory, that you can apply these neutral-sounding rules to reach whatever result you want. It shows how Justice Scalia can claim to be a pure textualist, yet almost always reach a predictable result.

    15. Scalia's explanation of what he thinks he ought to be doing when he interprets statutes. I enjoyed this, both because it gave me more insight as to what the debate about textualism and originalism (they're not the same!) is about, and because it's a chance to contemplate the ambiguities that can creep into formal documents that are supposed to be authoritative.

    16. Well written, as one would expect from Scalia and Garner, and fairly persuasive. A solid entry in the debate about how to interpret statutes. However, I found the authors' tendency to cite to other texts they had written as support for their arguments rather off-putting. Glad I read it, and I'll keep it handy to refer to, but I don't see it as definitive.

    17. People look at you oddly when you're reading a book like this, and they look at you like you're out of your mind when you're reading a book like this and chuckling out loud. It's not my fault. Blame my parents, friends, and professors. They made me what I've become. A delightful romp through legal nerdery.

    18. Scalia is first sitting justice since Story to write treatise on interpretation while on bench. This isn't beach reading but it lays out in precise detail Scalia's approach to interpreting the constitution, statutes, and contracts.

    19. A must read for every lawyer. European lawyers will probably disagree with many of the ideas expressed in it, but its nevertheless an excellent book.

    20. Excellent read. A thorough review of legal cannons and the guiding hand in interpreting legislation. One of the best books I have read in a while!

    21. As much about parsing the English language as about judicial principles. A very interesting read.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *