The Five Types of Legal Argument

Preface ix Preface to the Second Edition xi Introduction The Voices of the Law 3 Chapter 1 The Purpose of Legal Education 7 Chapter 2 The Five Types of Legal Arguments 13 1. The Five Types of Legal Argument Arise from Different Sources of Law 13 2. The Five Types of Legal Argument Function as Rules of Recognition 13 3. The Five Types of Legal Argument Are Rules of Evidence for Determining What the Law Is 14 4. The Five Types of Legal Argument Embody the Underlying Values of Our System of Laws 15 Chapter 3 Text 17 1. Plain Meaning 19 2. Canons of Construction 22 3. Intratextual Arguments 25 Chapter 4 Intent 31 1. The Intent Behind the Constitution, Statutes, Regulations, Contracts, and Wills 31 2. Evidence of Intent 34 a. Evidence of Intent in the Text Itself 34 b. Previous Versions of the Text 35 c. The History of the Text 37 d. Official Comments 38 e. Contemporary Commentary 39 Chapter 5 Precedent 41 Chapter 6 Tradition 45 Chapter 7 Policy 51 1. The History of Policy Arguments 53 2. The Structure of Policy Arguments 63 a. The Predictive Statement 64 b. The Evaluative Judgment 67 Chapter 8 Identifying the Five Types of Legal Arguments 71 Chapter 9 Creating Persuasive Arguments 85 Chapter 10 How to Attack Legal Arguments 93 Chapter 11 Intra-Type Attacks on Textual Arguments 97 A. Intra-Type Attacks on Plain Meaning Arguments 97 1. The Text Is Ambiguous 97 2. The Text Has a Different Plain Meaning 100 B. Intra-Type Attacks on the Canons of Construction 101 3. The Canon of Construction Does Not Apply 101 4. A Conflicting Canon of Construction Applies 102 C. Intra-Type Attacks on Intratextual Arguments 103 5. There Is a Conflicting Intratextual Inference Drawn from the Same Text 103 6. There Is a Conflicting Intratextual Inference Drawn from Different Text 104 Chapter 12 Intra-Type Attacks on Intent Arguments 107 7. The Intent Was Different 107 8. The Evidence of Intent Is Not Sufficient 109 9. The Framers of the Law Did Not Anticipate Current Conditions 111 10. The Person Whose Intent Was Proven Did Not Count 111 Chapter 13 Intra-Type Attacks on Precedent Arguments 115 11. The Court's Opinion Was Not Holding but Rather Obiter Dictum 115 12. The Opinion Did Not Command a Majority of the Court 117 13. The Opinion Was Not Issued by a Controlling Authority 119 14. The Case Is Distinguishable Because of Dissimilar Facts 119 15. The Case Is Distinguishable for Policy Reasons 122 16. There Are Two Conflicting Lines of Authority 125 17. The Case Has Been Overruled 126 18. The Case Should Be Overruled 127 Chapter 14 Intra-Type Attacks on Tradition Arguments 131 19. No Such Tradition Exists 131 20. There Have Been Competing Traditions 132 21. A New Tradition Is Emerging 133 Chapter 15 Intra-Type Attacks on Policy Arguments 135 22. The Factual Prediction Is Not Accurate 135 23. The Policy Is Not One of the Purposes of the Law 137 24. The Policy Is Not Sufficiently Strong 141 25. The Policy Is Not Served in This Case 142 26. The Policy Is Outweighed by a Competing Policy 143 Chapter 16 Cross-Type Arguments 147 Chapter 17 Foundational Cross-Type Arguments 149 Chapter 18 Relational Cross-Type Arguments 155 Chapter 19 Text versus Intent 163 Chapter 20 Precedent versus Policy 169 1. Jacob & Youngs v. Kent 169 2. Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium v. F.C.C. 173 Chapter 21 Text versus Policy 179 1. Text versus Policy in the Law of Negotiable Instruments 179 2. Text versus Policy in Separation of Powers Cases 182 Chapter 22 Text versus Precedent 189 Chapter 23 A Logical Demonstration of the Theory of the Five Types of Legal Argument 193 Chapter 24 Discovering a Court's Judicial Philosophy and Your Own Philosophy of Life 201 Index to Authors and Judges 205 Index 209 Topical Index 211