Abstract

The claim of this brief Essay is that Chief Justice [John Roberts]’s approach to statutory interpretation exhibits a “Burkean minimalism” that seeks to reduce [the] seismic effect of the Court’s decisions. In particular, the Chief Justice is drawn toward statutory interpretations that avoid constitutional questions and preserve legislative enactments against constitutional challenge. Avoiding disruption is not an unyielding imperative, as the Chief Justice is sometimes willing to join broad judgments with significant effects. Avoiding disruption does, however, appear to be among the Chief Justice’s preferences when deciding cases, and when interpreting federal statutes in particular.

This abstract has been adapted from the author's introduction.

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

12-2016

Publication Information

38 Cardozo Law Review 509-529 (2016)

Comments

Written for the symposium Ten Years the Chief: Examining a Decade of John Roberts on the Supreme Court (2015) at Cardozo School of Law.

Share

COinS