Dunn v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (95-1181), 519 U.S. 465 (1997).
Opinion
[ Stevens ]
Concurrence
[ Scalia ]
Syllabus
HTML version
WordPerfect version
HTML version
WordPerfect version
HTML version
WordPerfect version

No. 95-1181


WILLIAM C. DUNN and DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC., PETITIONERS v. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION et al.

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit

[February 25, 1997]

Justice Scalia , concurring in part and concurring in part

I agree with the Court that "the purposes underlying the Treasury Amendment are most properly fulfilled by giving effect to the plain meaning of the language as Congress enacted it," ante, at 9, which includes options to buy or sell foreign currency. This principle is contradicted, however, by the Court's extensive discussion of legislative history, see ante, at 6, n. 8, 8-9, 14, as though that were necessary to confirm the "plain meaning of the language," or (worse) might have power to overcome it. I join all except those portions of the opinion, which achieve nothing useful and sow confusion in the law.