Massachusetts High Court Ruling Shocks Public

legislative intent serviceWhat is legislative intent? Legislative intent, or the interpretation of legislation based on legal precedence and what is — and isn’t — written in current laws, can make all the difference, especially in unique cases. The State of Massachusetts, for example, recently considered legislative intent to arrive at a controversial ruling.

Massachusetts’ Shocking Decision
Massachusetts’ high courts ruled on Wednesday, March 5th that a relatively new phenomenon, known as upskirt photography, is perfectly legal. Although the decision outraged many, the court upheld the ruling — insisting that current legislation did not explicitly or implicitly mention upskirt photography. The courts considered current legal statutes, legislative counsel, and legislative history when making the decision. In this particular case, however, legislative intent services did not unearth anything implying that the current “Peeping Tom” statute would also cover upskirt smartphone pictures.

The statute in question begins, “Whoever willfully photographs, videotapes or electronically surveils another person who is nude or partially nude, with the intent to secretly conduct or hide such activity…” The high court cited this particular section, adding, “A female passenger on a MBTA trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is ‘partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing.”

Courts Take Immediate Action in Response to Public Outcry
Just two days after the ruling, officials recognized the need for legislation to stop the invasive practice. On Friday, Governor Deval Patrick signed a new bill, specifically banning upskirt photography. “Under the bill signed Friday, it will now be a misdemeanor to take secret photos and videos of ‘the sexual or other intimate parts of a person under or around the person’s clothing,'” The Boston Globe reports. “The law would apply to times when a ‘reasonable person’ would believe those parts of their body would not be publicly visible.”

Legislative intent — or, in some cases, the lack thereof — can make an incredible difference in court. Legislative intent services often help lawyers and courts make a final decision about unprecedented circumstances.