'''Canons of statutory construction''' are Rules_of_construction for the interpretation of Statute Law in the United_States. == Use of Canons == Canons give common sense guidance to courts in interpreting the meaning of statutes. Proponents of the use of canons argue that the canons constrain judges and limit the ability of the courts to legislate from the bench. == Criticism == Critics of the use of canons argue that canons impute some sort of "omniscience" to Congress, suggesting that they are aware of the canons when constructing the laws. In addition, it is argued that the canons give a credence to judges who want to construct the law a certain way, imparting a false sense of justification to their otherwise arbitrary process. ==Four main canons== === Ejusdem generis === "Of the same kind, class, or nature" Where general words follow an enumeration of specific items, the general words are read as applying to other items akin to those specifically enumerated. See McBoyle_v._United_States (1931), 283 U.S. 25, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 === Expressio unius est exclusio alterius === "Expression of one thing is the exclusion of another" Also known as '''The Negative Implication Rule'''. This rule assumes that the legislature intentionally specified one set of criteria as opposed to the other. Therefore, if the issue to be decided addresses an item not specifically named in the statute, it must be assumed the statute does not apply. An example would be Tennessee_Valley_Authority_v._Hill, 437 U.S. 153 (1978), whereby court upheld an injunction against completion of a $100 million dam to prevent possible extinction of snail darters. The court found that the listed exemptions to the Endangered_Species_Act was exhaustive. Since snail darters were not in the list, they were found to be protected. Also, see Passenger_Corp._v._Passengers_Assn., 414 U.S. 453 (1974). === Noscitur a sociis === "It is known from its associates" (literally, "A man is known by the company he keeps."). The meaning of questionable or doubtful words or phrases in a statute may be ascertained by reference to the meaning of other words or phrases associated with it. See Jarecki_v._G.D._Searle_&_Co., where drugs and photographic devices were not "discoveries", despite their novelty, where the context of the statute was income-producing activity in the oil and gas and mining industries. === In pari materia === "Upon the same matter or subject" This canon states that to determine the meaning of the particular statute, the court should look at surrounding statutes to determine meaning. The idea is that a set of stautes will form a complete subject body, and it is the job of the court to bring a contextual harmonization among the various related statutes. See Bowen_v._Massachusetts, where an action for "damages" included an action for injunctive relief that would require payment of money, a form of relief not technically within the definition of "damages" In the Virginia case Temple_v._Petersburg (1944) 182 Va. 418, the court determined that corresponding statutes defined the terms of enlargement and establishment and thus could apply to the current case. == Other canons == ====Criminal statutes should be construed narrowly==== Or Rule of Lenity for Criminal Statutes See United_States_v._Wiltberger, where jurisdiction of crimes committed on the "high seas" did not apply to crimes committed on rivers in foreign countries. In United_States_v._Sheek, although the mother violently abducted her children that she had legally lost custody to, she was still a mother as defined by the law and could not be charged under the Federal_Kidnapping_Act. ====Specific Language Controls over the General==== Also known as ''lex specialis derogat legi generali''. See People_v._Ruster, criminal conviction reversed, because there was a statute that made falsification of unemployment applications a less serious misdemeanor ====Last-in-Time Rule==== Also known as ''lex posterior derogat legi priori''. Given two conflicting laws of equal Constitutional weight (e.g. a statute and a self-executing treaty), the later in time prevails. See Breard_v._Greene, in which a criminal statute was held to prevail over the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. ====Deference to Administrative Interpretations==== If the statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue deference to an adminstrative agency's interpretation is used, as long as that interpretation is a permissible/reasonable construction of the statute. '''Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council''' ====Interpretation to Avoid Unconstitutionality==== See Kent_v._Dulles, where passport laws did not give permission to the State Department to prohibit persons with "Communist Backgrounds" from traveling. Also Webster_v._Doe, where Administrative Procedures Act was construed to allow a suit for violation of civil rights. ===="Clear Statement" rules==== Where Congress must make absolutely clear its intentions to alter certain aspects of state sovereignty. ====Interpretation in Light of Fundamental Values==== Statute does not violate fundamental societal values. See: *Trinity_Church *Riggs_v._Palmer ===="Charming Betsy" Canon==== National statute must be construed so as not to conflict with international law. ==Related reading== *Brudney & Ditslear, Canons of Construction and the Elusive Quest for Neutral Reasoning Category:Statutory_law {{seealso|Statutory interpretation}}