Comparing Methods of Statutory Interpretation Used By The Lower Federal Courts and The Supreme Court, by Joe Hodnicki, Law Librarian Blog
Joe Hodnicki calls this article “recommended,” which means we just found a honey pot for those who research federal case law and statutory interpretation. -CCE
“Here’s the abstract for Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl’s very interesting Statutory Interpretation and the Rest of the Iceberg: Divergences between the Lower Federal Courts and the Supreme Court, Duke Law Journal, Forthcoming:
‘This Article examines the methods of statutory interpretation used by the lower federal courts, especially the federal district courts, and compares those methods to the practices of the U.S. Supreme Court. This novel research reveals both similarities across courts and some striking differences. The research shows that some interpretive tools are highly overrepresented in the Supreme Court’s decisions while other tools are much more prevalent in the lower courts. Another finding, based on a study of forty years of cases, is that all federal courts have shifted toward more textualist tools in recent decades but that the shift was less pronounced as one moves down the judicial hierarchy.
The divergence between the interpretive practices of different federal courts has implications for both descriptive and normative accounts of statutory interpretation.’ . . .” Continue reading