First Name:

Last Name:

Telephone:

Email:

Address:

City:

State:

Zipcode:

Incident Details:

Yes, I would like to receive
the Morgan & Morgan newsletter.

form base
Home » Consumer Information » Crime

Statutory Interpretation

Every written law is open to personal interpretation from anyone who reads it. It is rare that people will agree on the exact "letter of the law" because the text can often be vague, ambiguous or difficult to understand. One person may read a law and determine a very specific meaning, while another may read the same law and feel it has a completely different significance.

Judges are frequently called upon to make an interpretation of any law that is brought forth in court. When a judge must make an interpretation, they will utilize various methods and principles to help them draw a final conclusion.

Methods of Interpretation

Laws are often written in what is known as legalese, which is a language that is made up of legal terms and jargon. These terms are often not part of the every day vocabulary for most people. When a judge is attempting to make sense of a particular law that has a lot of difficult to understand words, it is common practice for them to use a dictionary, especially a law dictionary, to help determine exactly what the law is attempting to say. One issue here is that some people will then argue over which dictionary has the most accurate definitions.

Experts are sometimes brought in to provide their opinions on specific matters. Perhaps the most common issue that requires an outside expert opinion involves the ownership and transfer of property from one party to another. When a law is vague on this issue, a professional in that area may be brought in to provide input. The final decision in the matter will still rest with the judge.

When the wording of a particular law is confusing, sometimes judges will refer to previous laws or statutes that are similar to the case at hand. Certain statutes actually call for the review of other laws that are already in affect to make a final determination.

Canons for Interpretation

Canons, or a group of rules, are often used by judges to make a final interpretation. There are three general types of canons: Textual, Substantive and Deference. The use of these to make a decision is criticized by some, but they are a valuable tool for judges who are composing a final interpretation.

Textual Canons

These are used to help understand the words and wording used within each statue. These guidelines include using the "plain meaning" of any word within a written law, defining a specific word within a statue based on the general meaning of the statute itself and determining inclusion and exclusion of items that are not clearly defined in the statue (for example, these three items were said to be "included", so it may be up for interpretation what other items are or are not included in the list of Textual Canons).

Substantive Canons

These guidelines are designed to lead the judge to choose a particular policy, value or outcome. They may specify that a judge should not create an interpretation that opposes the values that are considered to be held by society as a whole, or they may indicate that a decision should be made in favor of one side or the other during a trial.

Deference Canons

These rules suggest that the judge allow the interpretation to be made by another group, such as Congress. They are designed to enable the judiciary branch to work with other governmental branches when interpreting the law.

Many methods are used to help examine and interpret any law that is brought up in a court case, but in the end the final decision rests with the judge. This is among the reason that the US Court System allows for appeals; to help ensure that all cases are tried fairly and accurately in accordance with the law.