Intertextuality, Reading the Law, and Understanding Precedent

Legal texts are intrinsically intertextual – each case relies on prior utterances in terms of statutory or common law to establish precedent. However, thinking of a court’s decision as merely an interpretation of prior law would be an oversimplification. In political circles, we often think of judges as being activist or conservative depending on whether they expand on the law or merely interpret it. But interpretation is never a neutral act. Interpretation requires addition and subtraction – one must mold prior texts to fit current circumstances. Despite the admitted intertextual nature of legal texts, no one has systematically analyzed how a body of law is shaped through the intertextual interplay of prior law. My research aims to understand the rhetorical nature of law, legal precedents and legal writing.