Thanks to those of you who have responded to my first two posts on the law of interpretation and the middle path it presents. Here are some questions from those responses, and some answers.

If the law of interpretation doesn’t come from our lawmakers, why should we follow it? Isn’t this “law without mind”?

Some of the law of interpretation will come from our lawmakers — just on an earlier occasion. (That’s what Title 1 of the U.S. Code is — some law of interpretation enacted by our earlier lawmakers.)

But more importantly, there can be reasons to follow even non-lawmaker law — what we generally call customary or “common” law. Those customs provide defaults to allow our system to get by while we fight about whether we can do better.

Read more at The Washington Post