Textualism
A theory of statutory and constitutional interpretation under which courts read the enacted words as an ordinary reader would, giving effect to the text's public meaning at the time of enactment. Textualists generally resist using legislative history or a statute's supposed purpose to override what the words actually say.
A theory of statutory and constitutional interpretation under which courts read the enacted words as an ordinary reader would, giving effect to the text’s public meaning at the time of enactment. Textualists generally resist using legislative history or a statute’s supposed purpose to override what the words actually say.
Example: In Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s ban on discrimination ‘because of sex’ applies to sexual orientation and gender identity, reasoning that the plain text of the 1964 law controls even over what its drafters may have expected.
Common misconception: Textualism always produces conservative outcomes. It is a method, not an ideology — the same plain-meaning approach produced Bostock’s expansion of workplace protections.
Sources: Congressional Research Service, 'Statutory Interpretation: Theories, Tools, and Trends' (R45129), https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45129; Supreme Court of the United States, Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), https://www.supremecourt.gov