Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I write this on the evening before the Supreme Court's expected ruling on the fate of the Affordable Health Care Act (a/k/a Obamacare) because I don't want the decision in that case to color my favorable opinion of the book, which it might. Justice Scalia is well known, but Bryan Garner, the co-author and the editor of Black's Law Dictionary, is less so. They have collaborated on a prior book, The Art of Persuading Judges, which I liked, and I like this book even more. I don't think it is intended to be read cover-to-cover like the prior book, but as a condensation of the principles of constitutional and statutory interpretation, it is unrivaled. You could read cases for decades and not get as clear an understanding of how to interpret them as you would from thumbing through this book while attempting to interpret a particular statute. The first 51 pages, which include the Introduction and Principles Applicable to All Texts fall into the category of exposition on theories of interpretation. It is humorous in places. For example, at one point the authors quote from a constitutional scholar who says "the language structure, and history of law serve best as mediums [sic.] of restraint rather than excuses for intrusion." The use of the Latin abbreviation "sic." for "sic erat scriptum" or "thus was it written" leads you to punchline contained in the footnote which says "unless the passage refers to clairvoyants, media is the proper term." I'm not sure if that is Scalia's or Garner's work on display, but I still found it funny. In short, it is recommended for anyone who must interpret statutes. I consider it more a reference than an exposition, but one that save readers gobs of time when deciding what a statute does, or should mean.