hard · LSAT Reading Comprehension
Statutory interpretation often turns on the distinction between the 'plain meaning' rule and the 'absurdity doctrine.' Under the plain meaning rule, a court applies a statute's ordinary language as written, even where the result seems unwise or ill-advised as policy, on the theory that only the legislature, not the judiciary, may correct a merely unwise law. The absurdity doctrine is a narrow exception: courts may depart from plain statutory language only where a literal reading would produce a result so irrational, self-contradictory, or plainly contrary to the statute's evident purpose that no rational legislature could have intended it. Critics of an expansive absurdity doctrine warn that if courts too readily label disfavored but coherent outcomes 'absurd,' the exception swallows the rule, letting judges rewrite statutes under the guise of interpretation. Consequently, most courts confine the doctrine to results that are truly incoherent, reserving mere unwisdom or unfairness for legislative correction alone.
Which of the following scenarios best illustrates a court properly invoking the absurdity doctrine, according to the passage's narrow standard?
- A statute imposes a modest fine for littering that a court finds too lenient to meaningfully deter offenders, so the court raises the fine to a level it deems more effective.
- A statute's plain text would criminally punish the very officials it empowers to enforce it, simply for doing their jobs, a self-contradiction a court refuses to apply literally.
- A statute sets a filing deadline that a court believes is unreasonably short for out-of-state litigants, so the court extends the deadline to what it considers a fairer period.
- A statute grants a tax exemption that a court considers overly generous to a disfavored industry, so the court narrows the exemption to a class it deems more deserving.
- A statute's licensing requirement produces a result a court views as economically inefficient for small businesses, so the court carves out a small-business exception not found in the text.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Reading Comprehension practice
- The author's use of the word "demonstrates" most strongly suggests that the author's attit
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the primary purpose of the second par
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the author's attitude toward the pres
- Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the author's attitude toward true cri
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the primary function of the second pa
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the author's attitude toward urban mi
- Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?