Cardozo Law Review
Abstract
The article explores the Roberts Court's approach to statutory interpretation, focusing on its adherence to the "new textualism," a methodology emphasizing the plain meaning of statutory text. While recent cases like King v. Burwell, Bond v. United States, and Yates v. United States appear to prioritize statutory purpose over textual meaning, the Court's reasoning reinforces its commitment to textualism by framing decisions within textualist methodology, even when outcomes seem to depart from strict textual interpretation.
Disciplines
Constitutional Law | Jurisprudence | Law | Law and Gender | Legislation | Sexuality and the Law | Supreme Court of the United States
Recommended Citation
Anton Metlitsky,
The Roberts Court and the New Textualism,
38
Cardozo L. Rev.
671
(2016).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/clr/vol38/iss2/11
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Legislation Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons