The Prompt Is the Meaning

Why textualism, original public meaning, and AI governance all turn on the same uncomfortable fact: intent does not travel unless it becomes part of the record. There is an old fight in legal interpretation about where meaning lives. Intentionalists look for purpose. They ask what Congress meant to do, what the drafters were trying to accomplish, and what problem the law was meant to solve. Legislative history matters in this view because floor speeches, committee reports, drafter notes, and surrounding debate can reveal the intent behind the enacted words. Textualists are skeptical of that move. They argue that the law is the text that was enacted, not the private intentions of the people who helped write it. The words are the law. The meaning is what the text would have conveyed to a reasonable reader, not what a motivated advocate can later reconstruct from a convenient committee report. Originalists make a related move in constitutional interpretation. Original public meaning says…