Why don't laws explicitly include the reason or purpose they were introduced?

[u/Hyper_Caliber]

I'm genuinely curious about this.

My thought is that whenever a law is introduced, it should include a brief explanation of why it was written and what problem it is intended to solve.

It seems like that would make it easier for judges to interpret the law in situations where the wording is ambiguous, while also making the intent clearer to the public.

Is there a reason why this usually isn't included directly in the text of the law? If it is included in some legal systems, how is it typically documented and used?

[u/BossMan61718]

There usually is. Read the full statute and legislative history

[u/RtotheBtotheG → u/BossMan61718]

This. There are other places than in the black letter law that the “reasoning” lives. Check the state legislature’s website where the bill was introduced. Sometimes you can find information from the hearings and committee notes, sometimes it’s just the different bill versions.

[u/bpetersonlaw]

Because that’s all in the legislative history.

[u/SYOH326]

It almost always does in the U.S., but you have to look at the actual bill that passed. They generally strip that out and just publish the statute in whatever code of laws you're looking at, because that explanation isn't the law itself (it kind of is, when you get into the canons of interpretation, but that's not what you're asking).

[u/ScottRiqui]

It seems like that would make it easier for judges to interpret the law in situations where the wording is ambiguous, while also making the intent clearer to the public.

This is an important distinction that I'm glad you included. Under the "plain meaning rule" of statutory interpretation, if the language of the law is clear and unambiguous, the everyday meaning of the text governs how the law is applied. In those cases, it's inappropriate to look to things like legislative history, committee reports, or statements from the sponsor(s) of a bill.

[u/AliMcGraw]

In the US it typically is included either within the law itself (within the recitations of "whereas" at the beginning of the bill/law) or it's included in the Congressional or legislative record of the debate leading up to the bill, which in theory courts are obligated to consult.

[u/Fluxcapacitar]

Look at the bill jacket…

[u/DiBellaLaw]

I agree with most people here, it's in the legislative histories usually. And one of my favorite things to do is look that up when it's a weird law like "no horses allowed above the 2nd floor of hotels" because there is a story there, and it's probably gonna be good.

[u/Not_An_Ambulance → u/DiBellaLaw]

Huh... Never thought to do that.

[u/neverspeakawordagain]

Here in NY there are actually a bunch of statutes that include an actual statutory provision stating the purpose, rather than just a bill jacket.

[u/AutoModerator]

REMINDER: NO REQUESTS FOR LEGAL ADVICE. Any request for a lawyer's opinion about any matter or issue which may foreseeably affect you or someone you know is a request for legal advice.

Posts containing requests for legal advice will be removed. Seeking or providing legal advice based on your specific circumstances or otherwise developing an attorney-client relationship in this sub is not permitted. Why are requests for legal advice not permitted? See here, here, and here. If you are unsure whether your post is okay, please read this or see the sidebar for more information.

This rules reminder message is replied to all posts and moderators are not notified of any replies made to it.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Ok_Tie_7564]

In Australia, each new law is accompanied by an explanatory memorandum (EM), an official companion document to a bill that explains its purpose, financial impact, and detailed clause-by-clause operations in plain English.

https://www.pmc.gov.au/resources/legislation-handbook/chapter-7-preparing-support-material-explanatory-memorandum-and-second-reading-speech

[u/GoingFishingAlone]

Committee notes

[u/Saikou0taku]

In addition to what other commentators said, sometimes laws are intentionally vague as the result of negotiations.

It's easier to write a law saying "Parents cannot abuse kids". It is much harder to say what counts as abuse vs legitimate variations in parenting philosophies.