Resolving Ambiguity: The Continued Relevance of Legislative History in an Era of Textualism

14 Pages Posted: 11 Feb 2019

See all articles by John Cannan

John Cannan

Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law

Date Written: February 8, 2019

Abstract

This article argues that Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s decision in Allina Health Servs. v. Price, 863 F.3d 937 (D.C. Cir. 2017), currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, was the correct one, but only by chance. Kavanagh based his ruling on subjective textualism. Congress’ true intent for the provision at issue, 42 U.S.C. 1395hh(a)(2), can be found in legislative history that has gone largely overlooked. This paper examines this history and shows how legislative history, in general, should, at the very least, continue to be persuasive evidence of statutory meaning.

Keywords: Azar, Allina, Health Services, Legislative, History, Textualism

Suggested Citation

Cannan, John, Resolving Ambiguity: The Continued Relevance of Legislative History in an Era of Textualism (February 8, 2019). Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law Research Paper No. 2019-W-01 . Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3331342 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3331342

John Cannan (Contact Author)

Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law ( email )

3320 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
31
Abstract Views
148
PlumX Metrics