Abstract
“A matter of interpretation” is the title of an essay by the late US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia considered himself a textualist, i.e. a judge interpreting a legal text as it was written, neither more nor less. The twin concept of textualism is originalism. Originalists claim that the words of the American Constitution must be interpreted as they were understood at the time they were written.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See for details Chapter 3.
- 2.
See for details Chapter 27.
- 3.
See for details Chapter 1.
- 4.
See for details Chapter 8.
- 5.
80/897 EC.
- 6.
See with regard to the Kellogg’s case Chapter 11.
- 7.
72/166/EEC, 84/5/EEC and 90/232/EEC.
- 8.
See for details the Prologue.
- 9.
See for details Chapter 3.
- 10.
94/19/EC.
- 11.
See with regard to the Icesave saga Chapter 25.
- 12.
See regarding the notion of a private attorney general, Chapter 16.
- 13.
76/207/EEC.
- 14.
Now Article 157(4) TFEU.
- 15.
2004/38/EC.
- 16.
See for details Chapter 19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baudenbacher, C. (2019). A Matter of Interpretation. In: Judicial Independence. Springer Biographies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02308-9_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02308-9_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02307-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02308-9
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)