William N. Eskridge, Jr. is Professor of Law at Yale Law School.

• Acknowledgments Introduction: Why Statutory Interpretation Is Worth a Book I: The Practice of Dynamic Statutory Interpretation 1. The Insufficiency of Statutory Archaeology 2. The Dynamics of Statutory Interpretation 3. A Case Study: Labor Injunction Decisions, 1877-1938 II: Jurisprudential Theories for Reading Statutes Dynamically 4. Liberal Theories 5. Legal Process Theories 6. Normativist Theories III: Doctrinal Implications of Dynamic Statutory Jurisprudence 7. Legislative History Values 8. Vertical versus Horizontal Coherence 9. Canons of Statutory Construction as Interpretive Regimes Appendix 1 The Primary Legislative Inaction Precedents, 1962-1992 Appendix 2 Supreme Court Decisions Overruling Statutory Precedents, 1962-1992 Appendix 3 The Rehnquist Court's Canons of Statutory Construction Notes Index

Eskridge’s book is a most distinguished contribution to the literature on the interpretation of statutes; it confirms his leading position in this important area of legal theory. Not since Hart and Sacks’s famous book on the legal process, or Calabresi’s A Common Law for the Age of Statutes, have we had so fruitful and stimulating an exploration of the mysteries of legal interpretation, and Eskridge’s book surpasses those of his distinguished predecessors in theoretical sophistication.

William N. Eskridge, Jr. is Professor of Law at Yale Law School.

• Acknowledgments Introduction: Why Statutory Interpretation Is Worth a Book I: The Practice of Dynamic Statutory Interpretation 1. The Insufficiency of Statutory Archaeology 2. The Dynamics of Statutory Interpretation 3. A Case Study: Labor Injunction Decisions, 1877-1938 II: Jurisprudential Theories for Reading Statutes Dynamically 4. Liberal Theories 5. Legal Process Theories 6. Normativist Theories III: Doctrinal Implications of Dynamic Statutory Jurisprudence 7. Legislative History Values 8. Vertical versus Horizontal Coherence 9. Canons of Statutory Construction as Interpretive Regimes Appendix 1 The Primary Legislative Inaction Precedents, 1962-1992 Appendix 2 Supreme Court Decisions Overruling Statutory Precedents, 1962-1992 Appendix 3 The Rehnquist Court's Canons of Statutory Construction Notes Index

Eskridge’s book is a most distinguished contribution to the literature on the interpretation of statutes; it confirms his leading position in this important area of legal theory. Not since Hart and Sacks’s famous book on the legal process, or Calabresi’s A Common Law for the Age of Statutes, have we had so fruitful and stimulating an exploration of the mysteries of legal interpretation, and Eskridge’s book surpasses those of his distinguished predecessors in theoretical sophistication.

William N. Eskridge, Jr. is Professor of Law at Yale Law School.

• Acknowledgments Introduction: Why Statutory Interpretation Is Worth a Book I: The Practice of Dynamic Statutory Interpretation 1. The Insufficiency of Statutory Archaeology 2. The Dynamics of Statutory Interpretation 3. A Case Study: Labor Injunction Decisions, 1877-1938 II: Jurisprudential Theories for Reading Statutes Dynamically 4. Liberal Theories 5. Legal Process Theories 6. Normativist Theories III: Doctrinal Implications of Dynamic Statutory Jurisprudence 7. Legislative History Values 8. Vertical versus Horizontal Coherence 9. Canons of Statutory Construction as Interpretive Regimes Appendix 1 The Primary Legislative Inaction Precedents, 1962-1992 Appendix 2 Supreme Court Decisions Overruling Statutory Precedents, 1962-1992 Appendix 3 The Rehnquist Court's Canons of Statutory Construction Notes Index

Eskridge’s book is a most distinguished contribution to the literature on the interpretation of statutes; it confirms his leading position in this important area of legal theory. Not since Hart and Sacks’s famous book on the legal process, or Calabresi’s A Common Law for the Age of Statutes, have we had so fruitful and stimulating an exploration of the mysteries of legal interpretation, and Eskridge’s book surpasses those of his distinguished predecessors in theoretical sophistication.