Court Opinion

ID: 9432430
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:35:18.288364+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:23:34.036246
License: Public Domain

Justice Scalia,
concurring.
I join the opinion of the Court, including Parts II and III, which respond persuasively to legislative-history and policy arguments made by respondent. It is regrettable that we have a legal culture in which such arguments have to be addressed (and are indeed credited by a Court of Appeals), with respect to a statute utterly devoid of language that could remotely be thought to distinguish between long-term and short-term debt. Since there was here no contention of a “scrivener’s error” producing an absurd result, the plain text of the statute should have made this litigation unnecessary and unmaintainable.