Leg. history?

[ad_1]

Legislative history is a legal term used to describe any material created during the process of drafting a bill. Legal scholars and politicians can sometimes use legislative history to ferret out the intent behind an older law. This practice is somewhat controversial and, while freely permitted in some regions, is strongly frowned upon in others.

Laws, measures and legislative acts generally do not just arise. Most of the time, a bill or legislation is created as a result of an investigative process that determines whether there is a need for the law, what the scope of the law should be, and how much it will cost to implement, enforce, or enforce. application. Any documentation generated in determining these factors is considered legislative history.

Many legislatures form committees to investigate possible proposed legislation. These committees conduct extensive research and return reports to the legislator detailing their findings. Committee reports are considered an extremely important part of legislative history, as they are generally based on data rather than political affiliations or party positions. Some experts cite commission reports as the most influential type of legislative history.

The text of the bills and any amendments are also part of the legislative history. For those looking to interpret the bill later, the investigation often begins with a close scrutiny of a bill’s wording. Legal scholars can sometimes argue for years about the intention created by where a punctuation mark, such as a comma, is placed. The text of the bill is considered very important in determining intent.

Other forms of legislative history may include the remarks or testimony provided by the bill’s promoters and transcripts of hearings on the bill. These are considered less useful forms of history in determining intent, as politics and personal motive play a large role in testimony during the hearing process. While often illuminating, these areas of the legislative context are rarely used to build a case for intent.

Judges, politicians, and legal professionals can all use this type of story as a means of interpreting the law. In some regions, this practice is welcomed and even encouraged. In the United States, several major court cases have suggested that the use of legislative history is not acceptable and may even be dangerous. In statements against this practice, detractors suggest that debate and testimony are no substitute for the actual wording of the law, and it’s all too easy to find pieces of legislative history that support any argument.

[ad_2]