Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Reasons judges look past the plain meaning - Coggle Diagram
Reasons judges look past the plain meaning
Ambiguity
Two defintions of ambiguity
Narrow: when it is equally susceptible to more than one single meaning
Broad: when reasonable minds can differ regarding its meaning
Two types of ambiguity
Lexical ambiguity: when a word or phrase has multiple meanings
Structural ambiguity: when a word or phrase has more than one underlying structure
Absurdity
Two definitions of absurdity
Broad: Where the literal reading of a statutory term would "compel an odd result"
Narrow: When the plain language of a statute would lead to patently absurd consequences
Two types of absurdity
General absurdity: a statute that is absurd regardless of the particular situation
Specific absurdity: a statute that is absurd as applied to the facts of a particular case
Scrivener's error
Permits judges to correct obvious clerical or typographical errors
Locke's process
2) Search for legislative purpose showing it is an error
3) Search legislative history showing intent that it is an error
1) Identify possible scrivener's error
4) If no indication of purpose or intent showing that it is an error, then uphold the plain meaning
Constitutional avoidance doctrine
Even if there is a serious constitutional doubt raised, the court should first decide if there is another interpretation of the statute possible
Serves to protect the seperations of powers and further judicial economy
Directs that when there are two reasonable interpretations of statutory language, now which raises constitutional issues and one which does not, the statute should be in a way that does not raise the constitutional issue