An Interesting Legal Aphorism That Has Impact on the Restrictive Election Laws Coming at Us
Anglo-American Jurisprudence is replete with many sayings that have developed over time. It turns out that lawyers and judges can be clever, and sometimes funny. In thinking about the many voting bills coming down the pike around the country, one in particular came to mind regarding statutory law:
Argue the law if it’s on your side; if not, argue the facts; and if neither, argue legislative intent.
The rationale for this adage, and the reason why it is in a specific order, is the notion that a judge must follow the law. The fact that they quite often do not do so is likely to be the subject of another article. The theory goes that if the law supports your position, you win (except when you don’t). Continuing on, if you’re on the wrong side of the law, focus on the facts and try to show how the facts (if viewed the way you’d like) support a departure from the application of the law you don’t like. Finally, if neither the law and the facts help you, dig into why and how the statute came about.
It is the last portion that will likely be important in the fight for and against, since it focuses on the concept of intent. Incidentally, reference to legislative intent is not an outlier strategy — courts often engage in the analysis in trying to…
