Justice David Souter and Statutory Interpretation

William S. Jordan, University of Akron Law School

Abstract

The author of this article examines the opinions written by Justice David Souter while he was a member of the New Hampshire Supreme Court. The author argues that these opinions will predict how Justice Souter will decide cases that come before the Supreme Court involving the construction and application of statues. The article includes an examination of the two major views of statutory construction analysis: the "textualist" view, which does not permit the consideration of legislative history, and the "nontextualist" view, which uses legislative history to discern legislative intent. The author concludes that, if Justice Souter remains consistent with his New Hampshire approach and with the approach he used during his first term as a Supreme Court Justice, he will probably join the "textualist" faction that is headed by Justice Antonin Scalia.