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

29 Cardozo L. Rev. 1109 (2007-2008)
Intention Is all There Is: A Critical Analysis of Aharon Barak's Purposive Interpretation in Law

handle is hein.journals/cdozo29 and id is 1131 raw text is: INTENTION IS ALL THERE IS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF AHARON BARAK'S PURPOSIVE INTERPRETATION IN LAW Stanley Fish* INTRODUCTION In the body of the Article that follows, I shall be describing and assessing the arguments of Aharon Barak's Purposive Interpretation in the Law.1 My interest in that book, however, is parasitic on a larger interest in what has been called, variously, originalism, original intent, intentionalism, and subjective intentionalism. It has been for some time the prevailing view that by whatever name it is called, this view of interpretation is no longer taken seriously. It has been referred to as a dead horse, a discredited idea, a patent absurdity, and a misguided attempt to bind us to the dead hand of the past.''2 What is it, exactly, that stirs up so much opposition? Here is Robert Bork's definition, offered in an opinion piece lamenting the reluctance of any but members of the Federalist Society to identify themselves as originalists: Originalism simply means that the judge must discern from the relevant materials--debates at the Constitutional Convention ... newspaper accounts of the time, debates in the state ratifying conventions, and the like-the principles the ratifiers understood themselves to be enacting. The remainder of the task is to apply * Davidson-Kahn University Professor and Professor of Law at Florida International University. B.A. University of Pennsylvania, 1959; Ph.D. Yale University, 1962. 1 AHARON BARAK, PURPOSIVE INTERPRETATION IN LAW (Sari Bashi trans., Princeton University Press 2005). 2 Randy E. Barnett, Scalia 's Infidelity: A Critique of Faint-Hearted Originalism, 75 U. CIN. L. REV. 7, 8 (2006); see, e.g., H. J. Powell, The Original Understanding of Original Intent, 98 HARV. L. REV. 885 (1985); Paul Brest, The Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding, 60 B.U. L. REV. 204 (1980). Powell argues that the framers were not themselves originalists. But the question is not what view of interpretation the framers happened to have, but which view of interpretation is correct. If the correct view is originalism, in one of its versions, the fact that the framers had a contrary view is only of biographical, not interpretive interest. If interpretation works a certain way, but you think it works in some other way, the interpretation of your words will proceed in accordance with interpretation's correct definition, not yours. 1109

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