Legal Interpretation as Linguistic Interpretation

Andy Yu (University of Western Ontario)

In this paper, I defend the view that legal interpretation is linguistic interpretation. Although the view might seem so obvious to many philosophers so as to not require a defence, the view has recently come under sustained attack by some legal philosophers, perhaps most prominently Mark Greenberg. I canvass arguments by Greenberg and others for rejecting the view that legal interpretation is linguistic interpretation, and I argue that the arguments against the view fail. I suggest instead that the default view is and should be that legal interpretation is linguistic interpretation, and I further suggest that the philosophy of language has the resources to adequately answer the challenges.