About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

38 Const. Comment. 1 (2023)

handle is hein.journals/ccum38 and id is 1 raw text is: 





        THE PARADOXES OF A UNIFIED
               JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY


           AN   EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE NEW
                 SUPREME COURT: 2020-2022

                         Victoria Nourse'

     Six  Justices now   share  a  unified  judicial philosophy   in
constitutional and  statutory cases  that they call original public
meaning analysis. This Article provides the first empirical
analysis of  the Supreme Court's new interpretive philosophy,
covering  the 2020-2021   Terms  and  over 300  opinions. Although
most  associate  originalism  with  history, the  Supreme   Court's
version  of originalism depends   upon  finding the  original public
meaning of text-hence the convergence of originalism and
textualist modes   of  analysis more   familiar  to  statutory than
constitutional interpretation.  The  good  news  for the Justices is
that  text and  history  now   matter  in both  constitutional  and
statutory cases. The  bad news  for the Justices is that, in twice as
many   statutory and  constitutional cases, the  Justices conflicted
about   text, textual  application,  or  interpretive  principle. If
disagreement   amounts   to a  distemper   as Justice Scalia once


    1. Ralph V. Whitworth Professor in Law, Georgetown University. My thanks to the
faculty and students at the Harvard Public Theory Workshop and the Eskridge Yale
Interpretation Seminar, including but not limited to Dean John Manning, Dean Martha
Minow, Professors William Eskridge and Richard Fallon for intense reading and incisive
comments. Special kudos to friends and colleagues, Professors Bill Buzbee, Josh Chafetz,
Tara Leigh Grove, Lisa Heinzerling, Anita Krishnakumar, Jane Schacter, Brian Slocum,
Brad Snyder, and to Jill Hasday, editor-in-chief of this journal. I use the term we in this
paper because it could not have been completed without the extraordinary help of several
students: Louis Capizzi, Alexandra Li, Rosalie Peng, Eloy LaBrada Rodriguez, Ryan
Trumbauer, and most importantly, the highly skilled Kelly Yahner. Finally, special thanks
to my data-savvy colleagues, Neel Sukhatme (an economist) and Kevin Tobia (an
empirical philosopher), partners in a new enterprise, the Supreme Court Interpretation
Lab (SCIL), at Georgetown Law Center. This paper inaugurates that effort and its full
data (a 134-page Appendix, including a content analysis) is posted there as well as in the
online version of the present issue: https://hdl.handle.net/11299/259937. All opinions and
errors are my own.


1

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.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most