Courts may not amend a statute however desirable policy change may be

Evidence

We cannot amend the Federal Escape Act, however desirable that may be, so as to read, “The sentence imposed hereunder shall begin upon the expiration of the aggregate of all sentences previously imposed against the defendant.” The statute seems to be unambiguous so as to express the intention of Congress, and it is noted that in the Federal statute gov- erning good conduct commutation, Congress used the words “aggregate of his several sentences,” and the absence of such words from the zscape Act would seem to be significant. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 1059

Categorization

  • XREF: Directly parallels ch12’s held claim about no statute being interpreted without purpose and the limits on importing intent beyond plain words. — connects to: Indulging equitable discretion too far would make every judge a legislator. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 1303; Amendment-by-implication doctrine can ratify an agency’s contested interpretation when Congress touches a statute — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 509; Courts cannot preserve congressional power that Congress fails to use — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 2870 (+9 more)

Broader Connections