4 ms·

This position is totally at odds with that of many members of the US Supreme Court. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

• singleshot_ 4y ago
  No, because no one has yet taken the position that Supreme Court justices make arguments about how to interpret statutes. The opinions of lawmakers would of course have no relevance when a textual originalist was making a decision. However, my indisputable point remains and always will: the opinion of the lawmaker is not irrelevant. You may be able to point to a person to whom it is not relevant, and you may be able to argue about what relevant means (hint FRCP 401; and “relevance is a low bar”), and you may even dispute whether this interview counts as legislative history, but you will not be able to successfully dispute the relevance of legislative history.