Scholarly Commons at Boston University School of Law
metadata only
Outsourcing Interpretation: Justice Alito’s <em>Trump v. Illinois</em> Dissent
When a court seeks the “single, best meaning” of a statute, should it limit itself to considering the interpretations that parties to the litigation choose to offer? That approach would seem to outsource legal interpretation to private parties. But Justice Alito’s dissent in Trump v. Illinois sugges
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 — Private securities litigation#567616
- Interpretive Justice in Organizations: A Preliminary Discussion of Problems and Open Questions#695224
- Interpreting Legal Findings: A Critical Discussion of Results in Light of Jurisprudential Frameworks#1237139
- The relevance of foreign legal materials in U.S. constitutional cases: A conversation between Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Stephen Breyer#416101
- Enterprise Justice: Tyler Technologies and the Privatizing Court#171338
Record · ID 1416928
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive