About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

65 S. Cal. L. Rev. 845 (1991-1992)
On the Uses of Legislative History in Interpreting Statutes

handle is hein.journals/scal65 and id is 863 raw text is: THE 1991 JUSTICE LESTER W. ROTH LECTURE ON THE USES OF LEGISLATIVE HISTORY IN INTERPRETING STATUTES STEPHEN BREYER* I. INTRODUCTION Until recently an appellate court trying to interpret unclear statu- tory language would have thought it natural, and often helpful, to refer to the statute's legislative history. The judges might have examined congressional floor debates, committee reports, hearing testimony, and presidential messages in an effort to determine what Congress really meant by particular statutory language. Should courts refer to legisla- tive history as they try to apply statutes correctly? Is this practice wise, helpful, or proper? Lawyers and judges, teachers and legislators,1 have begun to reexamine this venerable practice, often with a highly critical eye. Some have urged drastically curtailing, or even totally abandoning, its use. Some argue that courts use legislative history almost arbitrarily. Using legislative history, Judge Leventhal once said, is like looking over * Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This Article was originally presented as the 1991 Justice Lester W. Roth Lecture at the University of Southern California Law Center on October 31, 1991. 1. See, eg., Frank H. Easterbrook, The Role of Original Intent in Statutory Construction, 11 HARV. J.L. & PUB. PoL'Y 59 (1988); Orrin Hatch, Legislative History: Tool of Construction or Destruction, 11 HARV. J.L. & PUB. PoL'Y 43 (1988); Abner J. Mikva, A Reply to Judge Starr's Observations, 1987 DUKE L.J. 380; Richard A. Posner, Legislation and Its Interpretation: A Primer, 68 NEB. L. REv. 431 (1989); Kenneth W. Starr, Observations About the Use of Legislative History, 1987 DUKE L.J. 371; Patricia M. Wald, The Sizzling Sleeper: The Use of Legislative History in Con- struing Statutes in the 1988-89 Term of the United States Supreme Court, 39 AM. U. L. REv. 277 (1990).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most