January 11, 2011

Justice Scalia in new foreign law mêlée

Senate Republicans' pearls clutched — Vapors strike Jon Kyl
When a thought could have been expressed more concisely, one does not always have to cast about for some additional meaning to the word or phrase that could have been dispensed with. This has always been understood. A House of Lords opinion holds, for example, that in the phrase "'in addition to and not in derogation of'" the last part adds nothing but emphasis. Davies v. Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries, Ltd., [1942] A. C. 601, 607. — Ransom v. FIA Card Services
And how typical that he would choose to defer to the House of Lords.

h/t Scott Lemieux ("Culture war rube-running" — Got to love it).

No comments: