AbstractStatutes permeate society. Administrators administer and interpret statutes. Litigants can challenge administrators' actions. In deciding the challenge, courts must interpret the statute. In doing so, courts must decide how much weight to give the administrator's interpretation. Doctrines of deference govern the amount of weight that courts should assign to agencies' interpretations. I use a sample of 1014 United States Supreme Court judgments to show that a low-to-medium level of deference is most likely to promote desirable interpretations that uphold the legislature's purpose for a statute and allow the words of the statute to reflect contemporary society.