Statutory interpretation

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.

Statutory interpretation is how courts read laws passed by legislatures. Courts typically review the meaning of the text, make inferences about the intent of the lawmakers, consider the motivation of the lawmakers, and draw conclusions from the committee discussions in Congress.

Overview[edit | edit source]

The purposive approach is also known as the purposivism; this is when judges review the legislative history of a law to determine its purpose.

In contrast, textualism is concerned with the letter of the law.

Interpretive rules[edit | edit source]

Judges use canons of construction to interpret statutes. These fall into two general categories: (1) semantic and (2) substantive.

Cases[edit | edit source]

Holy Trinity v. US (1892)[edit | edit source]

The Supreme Court agreed that in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States (1892) it was okay to depart from the literal meaning of the statute known as the 1885 Alien Contract Labor Law. Thus, it was permissible to employ a British Christian minister even though there was no exception to allow his employment without violating the 1885 Alien Contract Labor Law.

Nix 1893[edit | edit source]

Nix v. Hedden (1893) involves whether tomatoes are subject to tariffs. Tomatoes would be exempt if they were classified as fruits under the Tariff Act of 1883.

Botanists agree that tomatoes are fruits. However, because most ordinary people think of tomatoes as vegetables, the Supreme Court ruled that tomatoes were subject to the vegetable tariffs.

Locke 1985[edit | edit source]

United States v. Locke, 471 U.S. 84 (1985), applicants (Locke family) for mining rights filed their claim on December 31st even though the law had stated that they were supposed to file their claim with BLM (Bureau of Land Management) prior to December 31st.[1]

References[edit | edit source]

External links[edit | edit source]