• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Yale Law School Student Scholarship
    • Student Prize Papers
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Yale Law School Student Scholarship
    • Student Prize Papers
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of openYLSCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Codified Canons and the Common Law of Interpretation

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    JacobScott.pdf
    Size:
    3.174Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Scott, Jacob
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/17771
    Abstract
    Many scholars and jurists use canons—interpretive “rules of thumb”—to draw meaning from statutes, but do not inquire whether those methods are consistent with how legislatures want their statutes to be interpreted. This paper examines the interpretive preferences of each legislature in the United States and compares those preferences with the common law canons. Because the canons are nothing more than common law, legislative enactments that repudiate or support canons should not only should be included in any conversation about the canons, but considered important and controlling. As a result, my theory of the common law of interpretation and the codified canons suggests that the prevailing interpretive toolbox should be revised and recalibrated. Some canons that are controversial in the judiciary and academy, such as recourse to legislative history, are not so controversial in the eyes of legislatures. I also suggest that other judicially well-settled canons, such as expressio unius, are in fact unsettled because legislatures reject them in their codes. Finally, I show that textualism has a discontented relationship with the positive law because textualism’s embargo on extratextual sources conflicts with widely codified legislative preferences.
    Collections
    Student Prize Papers

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.