Law review articles using or discussing corpus-based linguistic analysis

Briefs using or discussing corpus-based linguistic analysis

Presentations using or discussing corpus-based linguistic analysis

Websites for using corpus-based linguistic analysis

Media coverage on applying linguistics to legal analysis

Cases using or discussing corpus-based linguistic analysis (in chronological order)

In the Matter of the Adoption of Baby E.Z., 266 P.3d 702, 715-32 (Utah 2011) (Justice Thomas Rex Lee, concurring)
State v. Rasabout, 356 P.3d 1258, 1271-90 (Utah 2015) (Associate Chief Justice Thomas Rex Lee, concurring)
People v. Harris, 885 N.W.2d 832 (Mich. 2016) (Opinion for the court by Justice Brian K. Zahra) (Justice Stephen J. Markman, concurring) (both opinions use data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English, but come to opposite conclusions as to whether statute prohibiting admission of "information" provided by a law enforcement officer under threat of employment sanction applied to providing false information)
Fire Ins. Exch. v. Oltmanns, 416 P.3d 1148, 1163 n.9 (Utah 2018) (Justice Christine M. Durham, concurring)
Carpenter v. United States, 138 S.Ct. 2206, 2235, 2238-39 (2018) (Justice Clarence Thomas, J. dissenting)
Wilson v Safelite Group, Inc.,930 F.3d 429 (6th Cir. 2019)
-- Concurring opinion by Judge Amul R. Thapur, 930 F.3d at 438-45 ("corpus linguistics is a powerful tool for discerning how the public would have understood a statute's text at the time it was enacted")
-- Concurring opinion by Judge Jane B. Stranch, 930 F.3d at 445-48 ("the use of corpus linguistics is a difficult and complex exercise ... I would leave this task to qualified experts, not to untrained judges and lawyers. See, e.g., Brief for Professor Clark D. Cunningham, et al. as Amicus Curiae on Behalf of Neither Party, In Re: Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America, No. 18-2486 (4th Cir. Jan. 29, 2019) (discussing use of corpus linguistics by professor of applied linguistics to help determine the meaning of "emoluments" during the founding era).” )
Caesars Entertainment Corp. v. Int'l Union of Operating Engineers, 932 F.3d 91, 95 (3rd Cir. 2019) (using data from Corpus of Historical American English regarding use of "previously") (Opinion for the court by Judge Thomas Hardiman)
State of Idaho v. Lantis, 447 P.3d 875, 880-81 (Idaho 2019) (Opinion for the court by Justice G. Richard Bevan) (using data from Corpus of Historical American English regarding use of "disturbing the peace" in 1887)
Richards v. Cox, 2019 UT 57, 450 P.3d 1074, 1079-81 (Utah 2019) (using Corpus of Contemporary English and Corpus of Historical American English  to investigate meaning of “employment” in Utah Constitution) (Opinion for an unanimous court by Justice Constandinos  Himonas)(Concurring opinion by Justice Thomas Rex Lee approving use of corpus linguistics)
Wright v. Spaulding, 939 F.3d 695, 700 n.1 (6th Cir. 2019) (Opinion by Judge Amul R. Thapar for the court affirming denial of habeas petition) ("We asked the parties to file supplemental briefs on the original meaning of Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement, specifically whether the corpus of Founding-era American English helped illuminate that meaning. A team of corpus linguistics researchers submitted two amicus briefs as well. We are grateful to both the parties and the amici for their hard work.”)
In re Trump, 958 F. 3d 274, 286 (4th Cir. 2020) (en banc) (citing Brief for Professor Clark D. Cunningham & Professor Jesse Egbert as Amici Curiae Supporting Neither Party also published on the Social Science Research Network at,
State v Misch, __ A.3d __, 2021 WL 650366 (Vt. Feb. 19, 2021) (meaning of "bear arms" in Vermont constitution) (citing D. Baron, Corpus Evidence Illuminates the Meaning of Bear Arms, 46 Hastings Const. L.Q. 509, 510 (2019), J. Jones, Comment: The “Weaponization” of Corpus Linguistics: Testing Heller’s Linguistic Claims, 34 BYU J. Pub. L. 135, 161 (2020), J. Blackman & J. Phillips,Corpus Linguistics and the Second Amendment, H.L. Rev. Blog (Aug. 7, 2018), https:// )
Jones v Becerra, No. 20-56174 (9th Cir. March 26, 2021) (order for supplemental briefing on how corpus linguistics helps inform the determination of the original public meaning of 2nd amendment), appeal from Jones v Becerra, __F.3d__, 2020 WL 6449198 (S.D. Cal. 2020) (rejecting challenge to statute limiting saleof firearms to persons under 21)
Facebook v Duguid, 592 US __ (Apr. 1, 2021) (Alito, J. concurring) (suggesting that corpus linguistics could be used to test the strength and validity of interpretive canons).

Back to Clark Cunningham Home Page