Scouring Dictionaries: Their Overuse and Misuse in the Courts

Abstract

Under the influence of textualism, courts have increasing turned to general dictionaries when interpreting the meaning of contested terms. This resort to dictionaries is suspect for two main reasons: as practiced, it’s arbitrary and unsystematic; and it’s linguistically questionable for determining meaning in a legal context. This article looks primarily at the first point—the courts’ arbitrariness when picking which definition they choose to apply. Using three cases from the Michigan Supreme Court, the article argues that the Court majority cherry-picked a definition that did not seem to fit with an English speaker’s common understanding of the term in context and that ran counter to common sense, practical considerations, or the statute’s purpose.

Keywords: Jurisprudence, interpretation, textualism, dictionaries, courts’ misuse, cherry-picking, context, statutory purpose

JEL Classification: K40, K41