written or by radio or television, which offers any security for sale or confirms the sale of any
security.” If the term “communication” were interpreted to include any type of written
communication, the words “notice, circular, advertisement, letter” would serve no independent
purpose in the statute.
However, if “communication” were interpreted to include oral
statements made through radio or television, then all the words in this section of the statute
would contribute something to its meaning, and none would be considered “surplusage.”
iv. Associated Words Canon
Associated words bear on one another’s meaning.
This doctrine is useful when the term
you are trying to interpret is grouped together with two or more terms that have similar
meanings. These terms may provide clues on how broadly or narrowly a term should reasonably
be interpreted.
For example, the Supreme Court considered whether actions taken by the
governor of Virginia constituted “official acts” within the meaning of federal anticorruption
laws.
The relevant statute defined “official act” as “any decision or action on any question,
matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy.”
Because “a word is known by the company it
keeps,” the Court concluded that a “‘question’ or ‘matter’ must be similar in nature to a ‘cause,
suit, proceeding, or controversy.’”
Those last three terms suggested “a formal exercise of
government power.”
Governor McDonnell’s actions––attending meetings, calling officials, and
hosting events––were not formal exercises of government power, and therefore did not qualify as
“official acts.”
v. Ejusdem Generis Canon
Where general words follow an enumeration of two or more things, they apply only to
persons or things of the same general kind or class specifically mentioned.
In other words, you
should use the specific objects or things explicitly set forth in the statute to determine what other
objects or things the legislature intended to include. For example, if a statute lists “dogs, cats,
horses, cattle, and other animals,” this canon would suggest that the catchall phrase other
animals refers to other similar animals.
This might include animals like sheep, but not include
protozoa.
vi. Related-Statutes Canon
Statutes dealing with the same subject are to be interpreted together, as though they were
one law.
According to Justice Frankfurter, “statutes cannot be read intelligently if the eye is
closed to considerations evidenced in affiliated statutes,” and part of the statute’s context is the
body of law of which it forms a part.
In certain areas of law, interpretations may cut across
Gustafson, 513 U.S. at 577-78.
SCALIA & GARNER, supra note 5, at 195.
ESKRIDGE, supra note 1, at 823.
McDonnell v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2355 (2016).
18 U.S.C. § 201(a)(3).
McDonnell, 136 S. Ct. at 2368.
Id. at 2369.
Id. at 2371–72.
SCALIA & GARNER, supra note 5, at 199.
Id.
SCALIA & GARNER, supra note 5, at 252.
Id.