Simple English definitions for legal terms
Read a random definition: damages for detention
The last antecedent rule is a way that courts interpret sentences. It means that a word or phrase that describes something only applies to the thing right before it. For example, if we say "letters or emails drafted by a clerk," the part about being "drafted by a clerk" only applies to the emails, not the letters. This rule has been around for a long time, but sometimes judges don't agree on how to use it. Recently, in a case about gun possession, some judges thought the rule should be used, and others didn't.
The last antecedent rule is a legal principle that helps courts interpret qualifying clauses in a sentence. According to this rule, a qualifying clause should be understood to refer only to the immediately preceding words or phrases.
For example, consider the sentence: "I will only eat apples or bananas grown in my garden." The last antecedent rule would suggest that the phrase "grown in my garden" only applies to bananas, not apples.
The Supreme Court first mentioned this rule in the 1799 case of Sims’ Lessee v. Irvine. However, recent Supreme Court decisions have shown that the rule is not always clear-cut and can be subject to interpretation.
For instance, in the case of United States v. Hayes, the Court was divided on how to interpret a statutory provision on firearm possession. Justice Ginsburg refused to apply the last antecedent rule, while Justice Roberts argued that it should be followed.
Overall, the last antecedent rule is a tool that courts can use to help them interpret complex legal language. However, it is not always applicable and may require further analysis in some cases.