Court Opinion

ID: 9435669
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 00:14:10.573109+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:23:52.898563
License: Public Domain

Justice Scalia,
concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
I join the Court’s opinion except for its reliance, ante, at 550-551, 554, n. 5, on the Notes of the Advisory Committee as establishing the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c)(1)(C). The Advisory Committee’s insights into the proper interpretation of a Rule’s text are useful to the same extent as any scholarly commentary. But the Committee’s intentions have no effect on the Rule’s meaning. Even assuming that we and the Congress that allowed the Rule to take effect read and agreed with those intentions, it is the text of the Rule that controls. Tome v. United States, 513 U. S. 150, 167-168 (1995) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment).