The Role of the Avoidance Canon in the Roberts Court and the Implications of Its Inconsistent Application in the Court’s Decisions

The Role of the Avoidance Canon in the Roberts Court and the Implications of Its Inconsistent Application in the Court’s Decisions

June 01, 2012
Originally published in Case Western Reserve Law Review

 

[FN1]. See, e.g., Hans Bader, Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB: Narrow Separation-of-Powers Ruling Illustrates That the Supreme Court Is Not “Pro-Business”, 2010 Cato Sup. Ct. Rev. 269, 269 (“Chief Justice John Roberts has often been depicted as an advocate of narrow rulings and a judicial philosophy of minimalism.”); Randall T. Adams, Note, Recent Development: Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder, 45 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 135, 135 (2010) (noting a canon of decisions by the Roberts Court “that might be fairly characterized as ‘minimalist”’).