Linguistics in Textualism

Should linguistics inform textualism? When legal theories make claims about another discipline’s subject, that discipline usually matters: History illuminates originalist debates, economics shapes “law and economics” analysis, and psychology imbues behavioral legal studies. Linguistic claims abound in textualist decisions and debates, but linguistics—the scientific study of human language—more rarely informs these. Now, critics argue that it shouldn’t.

This talk defends the relevance of the field of linguistics to the theory, practice, and critique of textualism. We offer examples, including the Supreme Court’s 2025 VanDerStok decision. Our argument implies neither that textualism is the correct interpretive theory nor that linguistics invariably bolsters it. Indeed, linguistics often challenges textualist assumptions and conclusions. The talk’s claim is simply that for both textualists and their critics, considering—rather than eschewing—linguistics would make discussion more sophisticated and productive.