April 11, 2007
When we left Tucson, it was 92; when we got to Atlanta, it was 42.
I arrived to quite a pile of material, including a new Supreme Court case and some other quite interesting stuff, that I'll post in the next day or two.
I've been hard at work on a book about civil procedure, and it's been quite interesting to read that material with statutory interpretation principles in mind. For example, often the older cases will have given a statute a narrow interpretation (e.g., 1292(a)(1), which gives interlocutory appeals for "injunctions") because of some non-textual Congressional "purpose," and yet those intepretations persist, not because the court has applied textualism to the statute and interpreted it anew, but because it simply continues to follow its own prior interpretation without applying a new one. I suppose acquiesence may make sense, but the whole experience has been a refreshing look at both civ pro and statutory interpretation. More on the two much later. (That book won't deal with these issue at all, though -- just a regular hornbook on civ pro!)
More to come.