Trump v. Barbara · ¶404

A codification of existing law does not change the law unless it does so clearly. When legislatures “consolidate their statutes at large into a code,” they “often revise the wording of the prior statute to provide for consistency of expression. But that revision does not result from legislative reconsideration of the substance of codified statutes.” A. Scalia & B. Garner, Reading Law 257 (2012). The same is true for “legislative restyling exercises short of codification.” Ibid. Such “new language does not amend prior enactments unless it does so clearly.” Ibid.; see also, e.g., Walters v. Na tional Assn. of Radiation Survivors, 473 U. S. 305, 318 (1985); Wingo v. Wedding, 418 U. S. 461, 469, and n. 9 (1974); Rainbow Nav., Inc. v. Department of Navy, 783 F. 2d 1072, 1076 (CADC 1986) (Scalia, J., for the court).

slip opinion, revised 7/01/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.