Journal article

Publication year: 2022

Pages: 192-213

Journal: Columbia law review

Volume number: 122

Issue number: 8

ISSN: 0010-1958

eISSN: 1945-2268

Publisher: COLUMBIA JOURNAL TRANSNATIONAL LAW ASSOC

Abstract: 
COVID-19 has killed over one million Americans, and its massive impact on society is still unfolding. The government's strategy to combat the disease included an order regulating the wearing of masks on transit. Recently, a federal district court entered a nationwide injunction against the government's transit mask order, ruling that the order exceeds the statutory authority of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The district court relied heavily on the statute's "ordinary meaning " and especially one word: "sanitation. " Drawing on common textualist interpretive sources, including dictionaries and data from corpora, the judge concluded that a transit mask order is not a "sanitation " measure within the statute's meaning. This Piece evaluates this ruling on its own textualist terms. It argues that linguistic principles and data support the opposite conclusion about "sanitation " and the statute's meaning: The text authorizes a public-health-promoting mask order. This Piece's linguistic analysis carries immediate implications for the case's appeal. The analysis also has broader implications for the future of the U.S. government's pandemic response abilities and for judges committed to ordinary meaning.

Harvard Citation style: Gries, S., Kranzlein, M., Schneider, N., Slocum, B. and Tobia, K. (2022) UNMASKING TEXTUALISM: LINGUISTIC MISUNDERSTANDING IN THE TRANSIT MASK ORDER CASE AND BEYOND, Columbia law review, 122(8), pp. 192-213

APA Citation style: Gries, S., Kranzlein, M., Schneider, N., Slocum, B., & Tobia, K. (2022). UNMASKING TEXTUALISM: LINGUISTIC MISUNDERSTANDING IN THE TRANSIT MASK ORDER CASE AND BEYOND. Columbia law review. 122(8), 192-213.