Textualism

Textualism is a method of statutory interpretation that gives primary weight to the words a legislature enacted. It treats statutory text, read in context and according to ordinary meaning, as the controlling source of legal meaning.

Plain meaning rule: A principle that gives legal effect to statutory language when its meaning is clear. Textualists often invoke this rule, while recognizing that context can clarify apparently plain words.
Purposivism: A method of statutory interpretation that reads laws in light of their general aims and purposes. Purposivism gives statutory purpose a more direct role than textualism does.
Antonin Scalia: A U.S. Supreme Court justice who became a leading advocate of modern textualism and originalism. His opinions and writing made textualist statutory interpretation prominent in American law.
Bostock v. Clayton County: A 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that Title VII’s ban on sex discrimination covers discrimination based on sexual orientation and transgender status. Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion applied textual reasoning to an unexpected application of statutory words.
Separation of powers: The division of governmental authority among legislative, executive, and judicial institutions. Textualists argue that courts should not revise policy choices made through enacted legislation.
Ordinary meaning: The meaning words ordinarily carried in relevant linguistic and social settings. Textualist interpretation generally asks what statutory words conveyed to the public when enacted.
Intentionalism: A method of interpretation that seeks the legislature’s intended meaning or purpose. Textualists question whether a multimember legislature has a single intent that can reliably govern.
Robert Bork: A U.S. judge and legal scholar known for advocating originalist constitutional interpretation and conservative legal theory. His arguments about judicial restraint helped shape the intellectual setting in which textualism gained influence.
King v. Burwell: A 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding Affordable Care Act tax credits for insurance purchased through federal exchanges. The majority relied on statutory context and structure, while dissenting justices disputed that reading.
Judicial restraint: A judicial philosophy favoring limits on courts’ power to alter or displace decisions made by elected institutions. Textualism presents fidelity to enacted words as a constraint on judicial policymaking.

Linked from 15 pages