Ad
related to: supreme court statutory interpretation
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Arkansas Supreme Court: "When reviewing issues of statutory interpretation, we keep in mind that the first rule in considering the meaning and effect of a statute is to construe it just as it reads, giving the words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning in common language. When the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, there is ...
In the US Supreme Court Chung Fook v. White (1924) marked the beginning of the looser American Rule that the intent of the law was more important than its text. This is sometimes termed the soft plain meaning rule , where the statute is interpreted according to the ordinary meaning of the language, unless the result would be cruel or absurd.
Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Cannon v. University of Chicago, 441 U.S. 677 (1979) that it provides an implied cause of action. Does the statutory prohibition on discrimination also imply a prohibition on and cause of action for,retaliation against someone who complains of such discrimination? Yes, the Court so held in Jackson v.
Asked about that during the Supreme Court's debate, Prelogar called it a "statutory interpretation question." ... the Supreme Court, and others who he might want to blame for TikTok being banned ...
The purposive approach (sometimes referred to as purposivism, [1] purposive construction, [2] purposive interpretation, [3] or the modern principle in construction) [4] is an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation under which common law courts interpret an enactment (a statute, part of a statute, or a clause of a constitution) within the context of the law's purpose.
In the years since the Supreme Court adopted the broader version of the major questions doctrine, legal scholars have criticized the doctrine along various lines. [3] These include arguments that the major questions doctrine is a symptom of "judicial self-aggrandizement," [ 4 ] that it is inconsistent with both textualism and originalism, [ 5 ...
Textualism is a formalist theory in which the interpretation of the law is based exclusively on the ordinary meaning of the legal text, where no consideration is given to non-textual sources, such as intention of the law when passed, the problem it was intended to remedy, or significant questions regarding the justice or rectitude of the law.
The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to hear former Trump White House chief of staff Mark ... “The opinion below applied long-established principles of statutory interpretation to arrive at its ...