154 He figured the new disputed title “costs” will likely be interpreted “to add new honor away from professional fees” for 2 reasons: “First, that is what Congress said they implied by the terminology. Second, you to translation furthers new [Act’s] statutorily outlined objectives.” 155 Fairness Breyer used brand new bill’s legislative records and also the Act’s “first objective”-to guarantee you to definitely college students with handicaps discovered high quality societal education-since the top evidence of the fresh statute’s definition. 156 The guy didn’t concur that the new statute’s text message was unambiguous. 157 Even when he noted one to a literal learning of the provision wouldn’t approve the expense tried of the moms and dads, the guy figured which learning was “perhaps not unavoidable.” 158 Alternatively, he determined that his understanding, “whenever you are linguistically the brand new smaller natural, is actually legislatively a lot more likely.” 159
A convergence away from Theories?
Many judges, not, do not always select because pure purposivists or textualists; if you don’t whenever they create, used, they will employ particular issues out of for every single theory. 160 Some scholars has argued that perhaps the theoretical gap ranging from both of these concepts is narrowing. 161 Modern purposivists think about the legal text message to get one another a starting point 162 and you will an ultimate limitation. 163 And most textualists will look after dark plain text message, condition alone, to discover the relevant perspective to discover what situation Congress try trying to target. 164
Into the NLRB v. SW General, Inc., this new Best Courtroom considered whether the solution of your own Acting Standard Counsel of the Federal Work Relations Board broken a law you to limits the ability of federal team to help you act as “acting officials.” 165 The truth demonstrated an issue of statutory interpretation, 166 and a lot and dissenting feedback both began the studies on legal text message just before continuing to take on a number of the exact same sources to determine the meaning of the debated statute. 167
One to Finest Legal proceeding provided in the 2017 shows the fresh expanding parallels between them groups, plus the kept differences
The vast majority of advice for the SW General, published by Chief Justice John Roberts, principally means a textualist point of view, though it also contains specific components 
of purposivism. 168 When you look at the describing the important points of instance, the main Fairness began with a reason of your own problem one to Congress experienced in the event it very first passed the newest debated statute, and you will, by doing so, felt the first kind of you to statute and you can then amendments suggested to address carried on disputes across the feature regarding federal employees so you’re able to act as acting officers. 169 The brand new Court began its study towards statutory text message, considering its definition from the trying to the normal concept of the terminology, legislation out of sentence structure, and you will legal context. 170 The fresh Court showcased a few “keywords” throughout the debated provision. 171 The vast majority of then noted that it don’t have to consider the “extra-textual research” off “legislative record, mission, and you may blog post-enactment routine” as the text message try clear. 172 Nonetheless, the brand new Judge continued to check and deny that it evidence as the “perhaps not compelling.” 173 Sooner or later, the vast majority of kept that pretending officer’s service violated the appropriate law. 174
Into the dissent in SW Standard, Justice Sonia Sotomayor determined that the newest “text message, objective, and records” of law advised the opposite end. 175 For instance the most view, the new dissent first started by as a result of the meaning of what, and you may recognized that “consumed isolation,” specific terms and conditions you can expect to keep the majority’s studying. 176 not, Fairness Sotomayor concluded that a couple textual canons out of design required one the fresh new statute shall be realize in a different way inside the white of your own full legal framework. 177 On the other hand, because the dissenting thoughts similarly felt “the situations prior to” the latest enactment of your associated law, Justice Sotomayor also place some weight on the historic practice of the newest administrator agency following the passing of the new law. 178 The newest dissent utilized the provision’s legislative record to inform their comprehension of the newest historical behavior underneath the statute, in its prior to and you can most recent variations, and you will hit an alternate completion on the bulk advice. 179 This is why, the new dissent signifies a purposivist view of the situation, however, one that however centered on the brand new legal text. 180