Justice David Souter and Statutory Interpretation
William S. Jordan III III
University of Akron - School of Law
University of Toledo Law Review, Vol. 23, pp. 491-530, 1992
Professor Jordan examined Justice Souter's decisions on the New Hampshire Supreme Court in an attempt to discern his likely approach to statutory interpretation. Professor Jordan found that Justice Souter had been something of a textualist, faithful to stare decisis, and comfortable with traditional canons of construction. He suggests that Justice Souter might join Justice Scalia in rejecting reliance upon nontextual legislative history and that he might not consider restrictions on individual freedom to be as significant as restrictions upon states' rights.
Date posted: April 26, 2005
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 2.437 seconds