Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts

⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️They Took the Key of Knowledge—This Book Gives It BackThis is not just a book for lawyers. This is the book for We the People—those of us who never went to law school but want to truly understand how the legal system works (and how it doesn’t work like they claim).Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts is a master key. It teaches you how laws are written, how they’re supposed to be applied, and how to recognize when they’re being twisted or misused—especially against ordinary Americans.You’ll learn real legal principles like:- Ejusdem Generis – general words are limited by the specific ones before them.- Noscitur a Sociis – context matters, words take their meaning from their surroundings.- Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius – if something is listed, anything *not* listed is excluded.These are not random Latin phrases—they’re the rules judges and lawmakers are supposed to follow when interpreting laws. Most people (and honestly, most lawyers) have no idea these tools even exist. And yet they’re the foundation of real legal understanding.If you're tired of the "patriot mythology" junk floating around online (all-caps names, UCC filings on your birth certificate, etc.), this book will be a breath of fresh air. It cuts through the noise and gives you actual tools—*not theories*—to understand and challenge misapplied law.I’ll say it plainly: this book should be in every American’s home. Not just for reference, but for defense. This is the knowledge that was quietly removed from public education. It belongs to you.“Woe unto you, lawyers! For ye have taken away the key of knowledge...” – Luke 11:52Well, here’s the key. Get this book. Study it. Share it.We’re not powerless—just uninformed. That ends now.

This book is a wonderful resource to my law practice and makes a useful gift to colleagues and law students alike.

To be the very best attorneys we can be, we must study. Don't ever hire a lawyer who has never read a case - without being paid to read it - since law school. Right? Thus, for attorneys committed to their professions, this book is essential.I think my colleagues who dislike Scalia don't like his manner - his aloof, imperious, wheezy, almighty law-professor aura. We all remember that from law school and we detest it. Right? The real criticism isn't his devotion to textualism, it's our natural dislike for inflexible, close-minded people. Scalia is certainly that. (God help me if I ever appear before him...).But the book is compelling. The Canons of statutory interpretation section is very useful, and very handy for legal subjects where statutes are bandied about constantly, and at every level (as they are with immigration law, for example). This section is where Garner's hand is most discernible, discussions of English usage are clear, bright, and rich with possibilities. And Garner's writing is a pleasure to read: as smooth and rich as oil. This is what you buy the book for.Scalia is most prominent in the very lengthy introduction, with it's dogmatic insistence on textualist sensibilities. It's almost offensive. We feel almost as though we're being scolded from the bench, yes? Scalia is really answering his critics here much more than he is trying to enlighten the reader.I'd be willing to bet that Garner strongly advised a heavy edit in the introduction, maybe to half the length, but was unsuccessful. And Scalia doesn't really write all that well either... it's not an elegant style. Reading Scalia is like trying to land a golf ball on a boulder-strewn fairway: uncomfortable, and downright trying at times. Many lawyers and judges find the "content" of his opinion (and other) writing objectionable, but I feel it'd be much easier to swallow if the "form" of the writing weren't so ponderous, and almost oppressive at times...But the Canons of Construction section will stand you in good stead when you're writing briefs and memos. Buy the book, read half the introduction, then read the Canons section. Keep it close at hand when you're writing. It's good background, good fortification for serious, scholarly attorneys. (People Magazine will suffice for the rest of you...)The book probably would have been better if Garner had written it alone, but it's still very much worth having. Even Scalia haters will like the book (c'mon, huh? The guy is from Trenton, after all...).