By now, you realize that legal reasons have degrees of quality, reliability, and acceptability. A claim is not valid simply because reasons are given for its truth or merit.
The following questions, pertaining to Case 4-2, will refresh your appreciation of this point.
1. Crucial to the Court’s reasoning is its claim that Congress intended the Federal Arbitration Act’s authority to extend to the state courts.What evidence does the Court provide for this claim?
Clue: Reread the section that begins with this claim.
2. Having answered Question 1, you now know that the Court relies to some extent on the legislative history of the act to support its position.What are the dangers with this type of evidence?
Clue: Think about your own personal history. Have your intentions always been expressed in a form that everyone who knew you could interpret accurately?