When talking about the interpretation of laws or the Constitution, you’ll often hear the term “strict construction.” This legal term is not only important for lawyers to understand, but also for business professionals trying to stay on top of current legal trends. Essentially, strict construction is an approach to the interpretation of laws or the Constitution that favors a more restricted interpretation of the words.
Rather than looking for the underlying values behind the text and finding the best way to apply those values, the strict construction approach looks to find the letter of the law and make decisions solely on that basis. The strict construction interpretation of the law or Constitution favors the most literal reading possible without any policy or moral considerations. This is in contrast to a less strict interpretation which might focus more on the underlying values or the intent of the law-makers.
An example of strict construction is Chief Justice John Roberts’s decision in the 2012 health care case. In the decision, Roberts wrote that the law “establishes a condition that the individual must satisfy,” and that the statute did not provide any other way to obtain health care coverage. The court’s position was that the only interpretation was the plain language of the law, rather than any attempt to determine a deeper intent or policy behind the law.
Why Use Strict Construction?
The advantages of using strict construction are twofold. The first, and in some ways most obvious, benefit is that it makes the law easier to understand. When the law is interpreted literally, it is easier to know the precise parameters of a given law. This makes it more straightforward to keep businesses and employees in compliance.
The second benefit of strict construction is that it keeps the law stable over time. By avoiding policy or moral considerations, strict construction creates legal precedent which can be more effectively preserved and followed. This helps keep the law consistent, requiring less re-interpreting by future judges who may not have the same view of the law.
Drawbacks to Strict Construction
Using strict construction to interpret laws can have disadvantages as well. Because of the emphasis on the letter of the law, the strict constructionist approach may lead courts to ignore the policy considerations behind the law. This can make it difficult to apply the law when it was written in a vague or ambiguous way, which may lead to the law being interpreted differently in different circumstances.
Additionally, some have argued that the literal interpretation of laws can be too rigid, making it difficult to keep up with changing laws and public opinion. As society and values change, some argue it might be better to have an interpretation of the law that changes with it, although this would necessarily weaken its stability over time.
To Strictly Construct or Not?
Ultimately, knowing when and how to use strict construction is a matter of individual judges’ preferences. Understanding the concept and its advantages and drawbacks is key for anyone trying to understand current legal trends and stay knowledgeable about the law. Strict construction may be an all-encompassing concept, but it doesn’t have to be daunting.