Legal Definitions - reenactment rule

The reenactment rule is a principle that courts use when interpreting laws passed by a legislature. It states that when a legislature re-passes, amends, or otherwise re-adopts a law, it is presumed to have implicitly approved and incorporated any well-established interpretations of that law previously made by courts or administrative agencies.

In simpler terms, if a law has been consistently understood and applied in a particular way for a significant period by judges or government bodies, and the legislature later revisits and keeps that law (or a relevant part of it) without making changes to alter those interpretations, then the legislature is assumed to agree with and intend for those established interpretations to continue.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Example 1: Tax Law Interpretation

  Imagine a state tax code that, for decades, has included a provision taxing "income derived from professional services." For many years, the state's Department of Revenue (an administrative agency) has consistently interpreted "professional services" to include income earned by independent consultants and freelance writers, issuing guidelines and rulings to that effect. If the state legislature later undertakes a comprehensive revision and re-enactment of the entire tax code, but leaves the specific language regarding "income derived from professional services" unchanged, the reenactment rule would suggest that the legislature implicitly adopted the Department of Revenue's long-standing interpretation to include consultants and freelance writers.

• Example 2: Environmental Regulation

  Consider a federal environmental statute requiring industries to implement "best available technology" to reduce pollution. Over several decades, federal courts have consistently ruled in various cases that for a specific type of manufacturing plant, "best available technology" includes a particular type of advanced filtration system. If Congress later amends and re-enacts the environmental statute, retaining the phrase "best available technology" without modifying its scope, the reenactment rule would imply that Congress intended for the established judicial interpretation regarding the specific filtration system to remain valid and applicable to those manufacturing plants.

• Example 3: Consumer Protection Statute

  A state has a consumer protection statute that prohibits "unfair and deceptive trade practices." For many years, the state's consumer protection agency has consistently interpreted this phrase to mean that businesses must clearly disclose all terms and conditions of promotional offers, such as "buy one, get one free" deals. The agency has issued numerous advisories and taken enforcement actions based on this interpretation. If the state legislature subsequently reviews and re-enacts the consumer protection statute, keeping the "unfair and deceptive trade practices" language identical, the reenactment rule would indicate that the legislature endorsed the agency's established interpretation requiring clear disclosure of promotional offer terms.