We study the performance of ChatGPT interpreting prompts that require legal expertise to answer. Our inputs are very close adaptations from the "Contextual Canons" section of Antonin Scalia & Bryan Garner's Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts (Thomson West: 2012). We report our experiments and findings for the entire section (comprising 14 canons) of the book. We conclude that as a legal reasoner ChatGPT is exceptionally successful in taking the contextual canons into account.