Scalia/Garner Proposition 2: The Supremacy-of-Text Principle

Part of a series on Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, by Justice Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner

Text trumps purpose. That’s the core meaning of Justice Scalia and Bryan Garner’s second fundamental interpretive principle: “The words of a governing text are of paramount concern, and what they convey, in their context, is what the text means.”

As Scalia and Garner emphasize repeatedly, the meaning of text depends on context, which in turn “includes the purpose of the text.” So a carefully cabined consideration of purpose is a proper and inherent part of textualist analysis. But that cabining requires four limitations, which they elaborate. (The first is that the purpose “must be derived from the text, not from extrinsic sources such as legislative history or an assumption about the legal drafter’s desires.” Read the book for the others.)

As Scalia and Garner spell out elsewhere, the fallacy of the purposivist approach (in which purpose trumps text) is to “assume[] that legal instruments make complete sense” and perfectly achieve some discrete purpose. The textualist instead recognizes that “No text pursues its purpose at all costs” and that “the limitations of a text—what a text chooses not to do—are as much a part of its ‘purpose’ as its affirmative dispositions.”

Most Popular


The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More
Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More