The following excerpt is from Panjiva, Inc. v. U.S. Customs & Border Prot., 975 F.3d 171 (2nd Cir. 2020):
"When interpreting the meaning of a statute," in this case, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, "the starting point of inquiry is of course the language of the statute itself." In re Edelman , 295 F.3d 171, 177 (2d Cir. 2002). "If the statutory terms are unambiguous, we construe the statute according to the plain meaning of its words." Nwozuzu v. Holder , 726 F.3d 323, 327 (2d Cir. 2013). In other words, "[i]f the meaning is plain, the inquiry ends there." United States v. Rowland , 826 F.3d 100, 108 (2d Cir. 2016). "If, however, the terms are ambiguous or unclear, we may consider legislative history and other tools of statutory interpretation." Nwozuzu , 726 F.3d at 327.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.