Epistemic Authority and Legal Interpretation

Abstract

My argument in this paper relies on four principle claims. First, I introduce the idea that interpretation is to a significant degree influenced by various kinds of authorities. Second, I explicate the notion of epistemic authority, distinguishing it from practical authority, in terms of the kind of reasons each provide. Third, I identify the conditions for justified deference to utterances of epistemic authorities. Fourth, I apply the conditions for justified deference to utterances of epistemic authorities to authoritative legal interpretation (i.e. the interpretation of legal officials, mainly courts). Accordingly, I conclude that in matters of legal interpretation it can be rationally justified to defer to the ascriptions of meaning of epistemic authorities under certain conditions. In the final part of the paper I discuss the import of an analysis of epistemic authority for discussions about legal interpretation in theoretical jurisprudence.