FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd. · ¶104

Justices have traditionally understood this relatively simple proposition. “‘In surveying legislative history we have repeatedly stated that the authoritative source for finding the Legislature’s intent lies in the Committee Reports on the bill, which represent the considered and collective understanding of those Congressmen involved in drafting and studying proposed legislation.’” Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers, 583 U. S. 149, 170 (2018) (SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring) (quoting Garcia v. United States, 469 U. S. 70, 76 (1984); alteration and some internal quotation marks omitted). Even Justice Robert Jackson— yes, the very one whose teaching serves as the coda to the majority’s denunciation of legislative history, see ante, at 14—recognized that reliance on legislative history is “justified where the face of the Act is inescapably ambiguous, and then . . . we should not go beyond…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.