Depending on how we understand the province of a theory of legal interpretation, it may be important to qualify this straightforward approach in several ways. (See Greenberg 2020, 136–141 for fuller discussion.) To begin with, legal interpretation is sensitive to evidentiary considerations in a way that the theory of law is not. Thus, a theory of legal interpretation may provide guidance as to what kinds of evidence are most reliable. Differently, there may be legal or moral reasons – as opposed to reasons of accuracy – not to permit consulting certain kinds of evidence. For example, it is plausible that, for reasons of democracy and fairness, private diaries of legislators are not appropriate kinds of evidence, even if consulting them would yield more accurate conclusions about the content of the law.