Did you know that, according to Guinness World Records, one of the longest running civil cases by an individual spanned more than 34 years? Legislation can be incredibly complex, and courts often spend an inordinate amount of time speculating about, and further researching, unclear laws. When is it appropriate for judges and courts to question laws, and what steps can courts take when legislation is undeniably ambiguous, especially in California?
What is Legislative Intent?
Legislative intent is a fairly broad term. Simply put, courts explore legislative intent when state or federal laws and statutes are not clear-cut. Sometimes, legislative intent may come up in particular situations, or often in situations that are highly unique, and without much legal precedent. In rare cases, courts will assess legislative intent when laws appear to have been drafted incorrectly.
How Do Courts Determine Legislative Intent?
Typically, in order to discern legislative intent, courts delve into California legislative history. Courts will look at a number of different documents and instances from legislative history, to see if they can shed light on the current case. More specifically, courts examining legislative history may:
- Examine the original text of laws and statutes
- Conduct California legislative history research, or federal legislative research, including reading and assessing past legal records
- Attempt to find discussion and floor debates prior to passing the legislation in question
- Research any amendments to the original law, including ones that did not pass
- Analyze minutes from legal proceedings
- Dig up relevant historical cases
In most cases, states will have several libraries or institutions, with a breadth of legal information, history, and records. Courts tap into these sources to help make difficult determinations. Today, courts can choose from traditional print sources, or save time and cut costs by perusing a digital copy, when available.
Thousands of cases have made it very clear. Laws, statutes, and legislation in general are often muddled in nature. Courts, however, do not have to rule on conjecture alone. Courts can tap into a number of different resources, including historical legal records and libraries, to get to the very bottom of legislative intent.