Legal Definitions - statutory interpretation

Statutory interpretation is the process by which courts, primarily judges, determine the precise meaning and application of a written law, also known as a statute.

Laws are often written in broad terms or use language that can be understood in different ways. Sometimes, new situations arise that lawmakers didn't anticipate when they drafted the law. When the exact meaning of a statute is unclear or ambiguous, judges must interpret it to decide how it applies to a specific case. To do this, they use various established methods and tools, such as examining the plain language of the law, considering the overall context of the statute, reviewing the legislative history (records of how the law was debated and passed), and applying common legal principles for understanding legislative intent.

• Example 1: Adapting Old Laws to New Technology

  Imagine a city ordinance from the 1980s that prohibits "motorized vehicles" from operating on public sidewalks. A few decades later, electric scooters become a popular mode of transportation. A person is cited for riding an electric scooter on a sidewalk, and they argue that an electric scooter is not a "motorized vehicle" as understood when the law was written.

  This illustrates statutory interpretation because a judge must decide if an electric scooter falls under the definition of "motorized vehicle" within the context of the old law. The judge might consider the original purpose of the ordinance (e.g., pedestrian safety, noise reduction) and whether applying it to electric scooters aligns with that intent, even though electric scooters didn't exist when the law was enacted.

• Example 2: Resolving Ambiguity in New Legislation

  A newly passed state law requires all "establishments that prepare and serve food to the public" to display nutritional information for their menu items. A small coffee shop that only sells pre-packaged pastries and bottled drinks, but does not cook anything on-site, is unsure if this law applies to them.

  This demonstrates statutory interpretation because the phrase "prepare and serve food" is open to different interpretations. Does "prepare" imply cooking, or does simply unwrapping a pastry count? A judge would need to interpret this phrase, potentially by looking at the legislative intent behind the law (e.g., was it aimed at restaurants with kitchens, or all food vendors?), or by examining how similar terms are defined in other related health regulations.

• Example 3: Reconciling Seemingly Conflicting Laws

  A state has an environmental protection law that mandates the removal of all non-native plant species from protected wetlands. Separately, a historical preservation law protects "any plant species that has been continuously present in a designated historical garden for over 100 years." A specific wetland area is also part of a historical garden, and it contains a non-native plant species that has been there for 150 years.

  This shows statutory interpretation in action because a judge must interpret how these two laws interact when their directives appear to conflict. The judge would need to determine the primary purpose of each law, whether one law takes precedence over the other in this specific context, or if there's a way to interpret both laws harmoniously to achieve their respective goals without undermining either.