Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=896310
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (263)



 


 



Avoiding Absurdity


Glen Staszewski


Michigan State University College of Law


Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 81, p. 1001, 2006
MSU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 03-24

Abstract:     
American courts have always interpreted statutes contrary to their plain meaning to avoid absurd results. John Manning, a prominent new textualist scholar, has recently challenged the legitimacy of the absurdity doctrine on the grounds that it cannot be justified by legislative intent or squared with principles of constitutional law. His critique relies, however, upon deeply contested economic theories of the legislative process and constitutional structure that view lawmaking as a market in which self-interested participants compete for resources.

This Article provides a comprehensive theoretical defense of the absurdity doctrine that relies instead upon significant aspects of civic republican theory, as well as liberal and pragmatic values, to suggest that while American lawmakers have broad authority to regulate in the public interest, our constitutional republic also has a responsibility to avoid needless harm to the extent fairly possible. When courts interpret laws to avoid absurd results - or privilege a statute's spirit over its letter - in circumstances that were unanticipated by the legislature, they are justifiably seeking to serve the common good that legislation is presumed to embody, rather than undermining a fragile compromise struck in back-room deals by economic theory's proverbial rent-seekers. The absurdity doctrine also promotes specific constitutional norms of fairness and equal treatment in a manner that avoids most of the institutional concerns that would arise from more aggressive approaches to judicial review. Not only is Professor Manning's critique of the absurdity doctrine therefore mistaken, but his apparent willingness to incorporate the same underlying principles into his kinder and gentler version of textualism demonstrates both the undeniable validity of those principles and the fundamental shortcomings of the economic theories of the legislative process and constitutional structure that underlie the new textualism.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 66

Keywords: statutory interpretation, constitutional law, textualism, purposivism

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: April 13, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Staszewski, Glen, Avoiding Absurdity. Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 81, p. 1001, 2006; MSU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 03-24. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=896310

Contact Information

Glen Staszewski (Contact Author)
Michigan State University College of Law ( email )
420 Law College Building
East Lansing, MI 48824-1300
United States
517-432-6888 (Phone)
517-432-6879 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,966
Downloads: 187
Download Rank: 94,025
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  263

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.421 seconds