Trump v. Cook · ¶38

We find neither explanation persuasive. Although neither the Government nor JUSTICE THOMAS say as much, both seem to acknowledge that Congress enacted this statute “against the backdrop of the common law,” Comcast Corp. v. National Assn. of African American-Owned Media, 589 U. S. 327, 335 (2020), such that we must look to the common law to decipher what “cause” (a term of art) requires. See Jam v. International Finance Corp., 586 U. S. 199, 211 (2019) (“[W]e ordinarily presume that Congress intends to incorporate the well-settled meaning of the com- mon-law terms it uses . . . .” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Indeed, the one authority upon which the Government relies for its definition of “cause,” the second edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, itself defined “cause” based on two cases—each of which sought (in the common-law tradition) to distill “cause” from general principles,…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.