Courts follow canons of construction as guidelines, not binding rules

Evidence

Courts have been working with stat­ utes for centuries. They have built up a body of doctrine on “construction” (interpre­ tation) of statutes. They have, in other words, generated rules—​or, more realistically, guidelines, rules of thumb—​about the interpretation of laws. Some of these rules are in the form of “maxims” or “canons of construction”—​slogans or sayings that sum up modes of interpretation in a pithy sentence or two. — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law, 498

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Courts decide statutory meaning where legislative intent is genuinely ambiguous — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law: An Introduction, 490; Some states statutorily reject the strict-construction rule for penal statutes — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law: An Introduction, 501; The strict-construction canon can be expressly abolished by statute — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 1597 (+3 more)