A Matter of Interpretation

Why it’s on the list: Scalia’s Tanner Lectures making the case for textualism — the enacted words as the law, read as a reasonable contemporary would have understood them — against the common-law habit of treating a statute as raw material for judicial improvement, published with responses from Gordon Wood, Laurence Tribe, Mary Ann Glendon and Ronald Dworkin.

Where I heard about it

• Brendan McCord — heads the Law and Legal Theory section of his Philosopher-Entrepreneur Reading List, March 2026: after two parts on institutions and rules, this is the argument about who has authority over what the rules say. Full transcription: The Philosopher-Entrepreneur Reading List.

About this edition

Scalia is explicit that textualism is distinct from hunting the legislators’ subjective intent. The entry carries a ☑️ on the source list; the page gives no legend for that mark, so it is not known to mean read, essential, or start-here.

Connections

• The Philosopher-Entrepreneur Reading List — the curriculum this card came from.
• Government — the separation-of-powers stake in who gets to say what a statute means.
• Regulation — statutory interpretation as the practical ground of administrative law.