How courts interpret

I. Textualism ​ concerns meaning as understood by the listener/reader during that time

Plain meaning-starts at dictionary, 1.authoratative and 2. time period
II. Intentionalism​ concerns the meaning as understood by the writer/author
Find intent in legislative history and administrative interpretations through agencies
III. Purposivism​ looks at what the consequences are that the authors sought to achieve or avoid, purpose in text
IV. Dynamism​ concerns consequences untethered to any legislative expectations,
Judicial activism. Look at what is in the best interest of our society. What is the best approach for our society? Concerned with the contemporary
of what will best meet our needs today

Cannons of Construction​ - ​Used when plain meaning fails to provide the answer:
● A thing may be within the letter of the statute and yet not within the statue, b/c not within its spirit nor within the intentions of its
makers
● In pari materia​ –​ (on the same subject or matter) statues should be read to avoid constitutional questions
● Remedial Statues are to be read broadly
● ​Ejusemm Generis (“Of the same kind, class, or nature”) – interpret the general language of a statue that is limited to specific phrases
that have preceded the general language.
● Expressio [​ or ​inclusio​] ​unius est exclusio ​alterius – (“expression/ inclusion of one thing indicates exclusion of another”) – (e.g. a
statute covering “any horse, mule, cattle, hog or goat” does not cover turkeys.
o ​Explicit exceptions are deemed exclusive

*A court’s refusal to consider the legislative history of an ambiguous statute raises​ Separation of Powers​ concerns

For a piece of legislative history to be probative of legislative intent, it must bear a significant relationship to the enactment process: (List is in
pecking order)
1. Committee Reports (including conference reports)​ *​ ​most probative of legislative intent
2. Markup transcripts
3. Committee debate and hearing transcripts
4. Transcripts of “hot” (actual) floor debate ​*​does not represent a good source of legislative history for use by courts,
ignored because they do not “bear a significant relationship to the enactment process.”

Administrative Law​- Made up of 3 Components (Rule Making, Adjudication, Judicial Review)

The agency must conform to the United States Constitution, APA, and the enabling legislation authorizing agency action
Informal Rulemaking​ §553 requirement of notice and comment, if agencies actions are inconsistent with §553 courts will make an “arbitrary
and capricious” determination and will remand the rule back to the agency and the agency can choose to reissue the rule. Agencies are required to
repsond

Informal Hearing §555 - agencies dont have to follow on the record hearing.

Formal Rulemaking- §556 and §557 enabling statute requires on the record hearing, trial-like procedures, governed by the Enabling Statue.
Agencies to use formal RM only when rules are required by statute for a hearing to be made on the record after opportunity

Formal Adjudication- §554 must be on the record

*President is not an agency because of separation of power laws.

Judicial Review​- review of rulemaking and adjudication

How courts should analyze if agency is acting inappropriately: 1. Arbitrary and capricious 2. Trial de Novo (starting from scratch) 3. Substantial
Evidence
1. Seminole Rock Auer Deference -* Highest Level (agencies interpreting its own regulations, will give deference); crts will defer as
long as it is NOT ​plainly erroneous
2. Chevron Deference- (*Medium Level) (applies when the court finds that a ​statute​ is ambiguous and will refer to agency
interpretation as long as its reasonable *CD only applies to ambiguity in a statue
3. Skidmore Deference - *Lowest Level of Deference (applies when agency does not have lawmaking authority, did not use lawmaking
authority, or the agency is interpreting statutes that other agencies are also interpreting, could get deference due to experience and
expertise they are bringing. Courts will defer if agencies are persuasive.

Chevron Step Zero: ​Courts ask ​Is this the kind of agency Congress intended to have Chevron deference
Anti Parroting Rule​ - ​ no deference will be provided if an agency is just quoting the statue.
Non- Delegation Doctrine​ - Congress cannot delegate authority to other agencies b/c power to make legislation is unique to Article I. Congress
can delegate in a way that is constrained and limits authority given to agencies
Intelligible Principle​-​ Congress must lay down an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to act (​agency)​is directed to
conform.
Inferior Officer -

Notice shall include :

1. A statement of the time and place and the nature of public rule making
2.