Tara Leigh Grove's guest appearances

Tara Leigh Grove

Business Forward

Ipse Dixit

Supreme Myths

William Dailey

Christopher Green

Anthony Kreis

Evan Bernick

Ilya Somin

Scott Shapiro

Carissa Byrne Hessick

Brian Leiter

Orin Kerr

Franita Tolson

Adam Winkler

Christopher Sprigman

Clark Neily

Simon Tam

Greg Shill

OwlTail

Professor Tara Leigh Grove stops by Supreme Myths to talk about statutory and constitutional interpretation, the legitimacy dilemma facing the Supreme Court, and her work on the Supreme Court Reform Commission.

Professor Tara Leigh Grove stops by Supreme Myths to talk about statutory and constitutional interpretation, the legitimacy dilemma facing the Supreme Court, and her work on the Supreme Court Reform Commission.

Episode 54: Professor Tara Leigh Grove

In this episode, Tara Leigh Grove, Charles E. Tweedy, Jr. Endowed Chairholder in Law at the University of Alabama School of Law, discusses her article "Which Textualism?," which is published in the Harvard Law Review. Grove begins by explaining the conventional understanding of statutory interpretation as a disagreement between purposivism and textualism. She observes that there is a split within textualism between formalistic and flexible approaches, and points out that different versions of textualism can reach different results, as in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020). She argues that formalistic textualism is better, because it constrains judges more effectively and hews more closely to the legislative process. Grove is on Twitter at @TaraLeighGrove1.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, <a href="https://www.law.ua.edu/directory/People/view/Tara_Leigh_Grove" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Tara Leigh Grove</a>, Charles E. Tweedy, Jr. Endowed Chairholder in Law at the University of Alabama School of Law, discusses her article "<a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3674050" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Which Textualism?</a>," which is published in the Harvard Law Review. Grove begins by explaining the conventional understanding of statutory interpretation as a disagreement between purposivism and textualism. She observes that there is a split within textualism between formalistic and flexible approaches, and points out that different versions of textualism can reach different results, as in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020). She argues that formalistic textualism is better, because it constrains judges more effectively and hews more closely to the legislative process. Grove is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/TaraLeighGrove1" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@TaraLeighGrove1</a>.This episode was hosted by <a href="http://law.uky.edu/directory/brian-l-frye" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Brian L. Frye</a>, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/brianlfrye" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@brianlfrye</a>. Hosted on Acast. See <a href="https://acast.com/privacy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">acast.com/privacy</a> for more information.

Tara Leigh Grove of Versions of Textualism

Sarah Turberville

Tara Leigh Grove, Professor of Law at William and Mary Law School, and Sarah Turberville, Director of the Constitution Project at the Project on Government Oversight, join Business Forward to discuss defending America's federal courts

Tara Leigh Grove and Sarah Turberville