Textualism is the interpretative theory espoused by the late Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas, Justice Gorsuch, and many other federal and state judges. In this talk, Professor Kimble will first review some fascinating high-level cases in which courts have grappled with applying textual canons. He will ask the audience to consider (1) how better drafting could have avoided the interpretive issue in the first place, (2) the soundness of the canons that the courts applied, and (3) the relative merits of textual and nontextual arguments in these cases. He will then present empirical evidence on whether textualism is the neutral, objective, nonideological approach to judging that it claims to be. Co-Sponsored by American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (James E. Rogers College of Law Student Chapter) and University of Arizona Law Legal Writing Department. Eligible for 1 hour CLE, including 1 ethics.
THANK YOU TO OUR TOP LEVEL 2017 CONVENTION SPONSORS