Statutory Interpretation Doctrine on the Modern Supreme Court and Four Doctrinal Approaches to Judicial Decision-making

Abstract

The intent of this Article is to place into context the various approaches of the Supreme Court regarding questions of statutory interpretation. In undertaking this task, I will use a conceptual scheme developed elsewhere to analyze approaches to judicial decision..making. That scheme states that in American legal history there have been four main approaches to judicial decision-making: natural law, formalism, Holmesian, and instrumentalism.'" Understanding these four types of judicial decision-making styles can help make sense of the various arguments concerning statutory interpretation used by the Court today.

In pursuit of this goal, Part I of this Article will examine the various versions of natural law, formalist, Holmesian, and instrumentalist approaches to statutory interpretation. This discussion will conclude that Justice Scalia's New Textualism is an example of a formalist approach, Originalism is an example of a Holmesian approach, the Legal Process school is an example of an instrumentalist approach, and Justice Breyer's approach is a modem version of the traditional natural law approach to statutory interpretation. Part II of this Article will put into context the modem Supreme Court debate, concluding that the Court is likely to adopt a modem version of the traditional natural law model of statutory interpretation. As discussed herein, this approach has great affinities with a Holmesian approach. As part of this approach, the use of legislative purpose to help interpret a statute, and resort to legislative history to help illuminate legislative intent, will be discussed. Part III will provide a brief conclusion.