With the demands on a legislative drafter, it is easy to wonder where it is best to focus time and energy. Should a drafter focus efforts solely on substantive drafting, or worry about "style" issues? This debate has the familiar feel of "form over substance." In the literature of legislative drafting, the debate arguably is encompassed in a question of whether the goal of drafting is clarity or accuracy.m See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 9-12 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 4-10 (2nd ed. 2003)("Although [accuracy] is more a function of substance than style, the two are inexorably linked."); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 1-5 (1996). However, the goal is achieving both clarity and accuracy. The joining of clarity and accuracy creates readability.
If unreadable, a statute may be misinterpreted or fail to capture a necessary element.m Confucius is quoted as saying that "if language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is meant, then what ought to be done remains undone." Crabbe, The Legislative Sentence , 10 Statute L. Rev. 94 (1989) (quoting Sir Ernest Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, p. 159 (Pelican Books, 1983 reprint). In stating seven rules of legal writing, one author encourages a drafter not to "ignore even the limited possibilities of precision. The price of sloppy writing is misunderstanding and creative misinterpretation." Mellinkoff, Legal Writing: Sense and Nonsense, p. xviii (1982). "Words can be unreadable if archaic or rare. Sentences can be unreadable if long or complex. Style can be unreadable if stuffy or unfamiliar. Organization can be unreadable if counterintuitive." c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 180 (2006).
The following discussion is designed to highlight common elements of legislative style that a legislative drafter should employ regardless of the substantive area in which the drafter drafts.
Once a legislative objective is given by the sponsor, an initial step is framing the basic structure of the legislative proposal. This generally requires creating relationships between the one or more actors, actions, conditions, and consequences.
Effectively developing an organization or structure of a legislative proposal assists a legislative drafter in thinking through a policy objective. Effective legislative drafting requires a legislative drafter to see beyond the obvious to ensure that a draft is comprehensive.m "Drafts can be failures for two reasons: Some are failures of communication, while others are failures of imagination. Some who write about drafting focus only on failures of the first type. They reason that thinking and writing go hand in hand, so writing well also guides you into thinking well. That's fine as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. . . . . When there is a failure to imagine, however, the draft is not adequate. The problem is not on the page and is invisible to the naked eye. The words look fine, but the thinking behind them is less than thorough. A failure to imagine cannot be cured by editing after the fact; it can be cured only by thinking through the policy." Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 111 (2006).
Considerations that may influence the structure of legislation include a desire for simplicity and limiting duplication, but competing with this is the ability of a court, regulator, practitioner, researcher, or citizen to find relevant law.c See Blackwell, Finally Adding Method to Madness: Applying Principles of Object-Oriented Analysis and Design to Legislative Drafting , 3 N.Y.U. J. Legis. & Pub. Pol'y 227 (1999/2000). Examples of tools that can be used to create a reasonable structure include an outline, sequential ordering, or a checklist.
The strength of an outline is that it creates a format or logical flow to the content of legislation. Without proper organization and arrangement, the major concepts of legislation may easily be lost.m Put another way by an experienced legislative drafter, "Nietzsche's remark that the most common cause of stupidity is forgetting one's goal certainly applies to drafters, and the second most common cause of drafting stupidity probably is never knowing one's goal." Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 14 (1996). A good outline, if comprehensive, minimizes later editing and redrafting. In developing an outline, a drafter should consider provisions in the following areas.
Main Theme: | Set forth the core purpose of the legislation, such as creating a duty or establishing an agency. |
General | |
Application: | Establish a requirement or procedure that accomplishes the core purpose, including the scope and nature of a prohibition or grant of authority. |
Special Rules: | Further define a requirement or procedure by providing for an exception, limitation, or condition to a rule of general application. |
Remedies: | Create civil or criminal penalties for failure to comply with the law. |
The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State laws provides the following suggested order of arrangement:
An outline, at its best, assists a legislative drafter in both establishing a proper sequence to the provisions in legislation and determining whether necessary provisions to address the policy objectives of a legislative client are included in the legislation.
Another tool of organization is to determine the sequence of the major components of legislation.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 204-206 (2006). To some extent, the Utah Code dictates the sequence of certain provisions such as the order in which common provisions appear such as a title or definitions.m Click here for information on section placement. However, within the body of a statute there are several sequential possibilities such as:
A legislative drafter should choose the sequential order that best serves the legislative objectives.
Although not technically an organizational construct, a checklist is a tool that helps a drafter determine whether the necessary elements are included in a draft.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 19, 21 (2005). A checklist may be most helpful when working with an existing draft, because it is easy to overlook a necessary item when a draft appears complete. A checklist can serve as a type of reality check, a helpful tool to determine whether or not legislation meets a desired objective.m See, e.g., Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 34-38 (1996) ("legislative drafters . . . will be more effective if they remember that work in the world of statutes, because it has real world consequences, should be subjected to a reality check."); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 127-131 (2006). Dorsey highlights two ways to test legal rules: the actor-action model and the if-then model. "To test a rule with the Actor-Action model, identify the actor, the action, and the qualifiers. If you can't figure out who the actor is (or what the action is), you and the client have some more thinking to do. When a rule fails to identify the actor or the action directly, the courts may struggle to figure out what the legislature intended.. . . . There is a completely different root idea that you also need in thinking through the policy, and that is the notion (referred to here as the If-Then model) that every legal rule can be expressed as a condition and a result. . . . . The value of the If-Then model is that it makes you focus on consequences - when you use this model, you often realize that you and the client haven't adequately considered what the consequences should be." Id. Each area of the law may require its own checklist and over time a drafter can develop a checklist that best works for that drafter. An example of a checklist consists of a series of questions:
Click here for another example of a helpful checklist (a research checklist).
Once a structure is formulated, a legislative drafter next starts to "build" the legislation. Legislation should be structured so that the legislation is logical and accessible. The arrangement and parallel construction of sentences or phrases become critical to the structure of legislation.
Do not say: | Say: |
(1) The commission shall: (a) receive applications (b) it sets fees; and (c) approving licenses. |
(1) The commission shall: (a) receive an application; (b) set fees; and (c) approve a license. |
Do not say: | Say: |
If a person with a temporary license that has applied for a permanent license fails an examination or if the person is convicted of a crime after applying for a license, the division shall revoke the temporary license. | (1) The division shall revoke the temporary license of a person if the person: (a) has applied for a permanent license; and (b) after applying for a permanent license: (i) fails an examination under this chapter; or (ii) is convicted of a crime. |
Do not say: | Say: |
An applicant for a license in this state . . . |
A license applicant from this state . . . Unless you mean:
An applicant for a license to act in this state . . . |
Do not say: | Say: |
The provisions of this act shall be considered as an alternative or additional power and not as a limitation on any other power granted to or possessed by municipalities. The provisions of this act shall not be considered as impairing, altering, modifying, or repealing any of the jurisdiction or powers possessed by any department, division, commission, board, or office of state government. | (1) This chapter provides a municipality alternative or additional power and may not be construed as limiting another power granted to or possessed by a municipality. (2) This chapter may not be considered as impairing, altering, modifying, or repealing the jurisdiction or a power possessed by one or more of the following of state government: (a) a department; (b) a division; (c) a commission; (d) a board; or (e) an office. |
As with most writing, the core of a statutory unit is the sentence. A good guideline is to limit a sentence to a single idea or thought.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 61 (2005).
An experienced legislative drafter suggests that in crafting a legislative sentence it is important to:
A basic, but at times forgotten, rule of drafting is the creation of agreement between subject and verb and between pronoun and antecedent. A pronoun like a noun has four basic properties, i.e., number, person, gender, and case, and must agree with its antecedent in number, person, and gender.c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.30 - 5.34 (16th ed. 2010).
Do not say: | Say: |
If the division determines an application is incomplete, they shall . . . | If the division determines an application is incomplete, it shall . . . |
One of the tasks of a legislative drafter is to aid a reader in processing the details of complex problems which could include multiple actors, actions, objects, or qualifiers. Including all the detail in a single sentence may make it more difficult to comprehend a statutory provision.
The exact manner of subdividing a sentence or paragraph differs from statute to statute, and requires careful thought by a legislative drafter. As one experienced legislative drafter explains:
When possible, a legislative drafter should follow a general guideline of not stringing more than two to three sentences together without subdividing.c See Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 209 (2006).
An effective legislative drafter uses familiar language that expresses the intended meaning according to common and approved usage.
A term used in drafting should be easily understood, with those few exceptions defined. A balance must be struck between excessive technical terms and inappropriate conversational tone. A technical term can be used if properly defined. A statute should not be overly simplistic or informal.
Principles that assist a legislative drafter in the choice of language include the following:
Do not say: | If you mean: |
firearm vehicle aircraft |
handgun automobile helicopter |
Do not say: | Say |
After the governor appoints the director, he shall file a conflict disclosure form. | Within 15 days after the day on which the governor appoints a director, the director shall file a conflict disclosure form. |
[a distance of] two miles | join [together] | [rate of] speed |
each [separate] provision | [as to] whether | [different] kinds |
[a period of] a week | [general] public | recur [again] |
[empty] space | [at a] later [date] | during [the course of] |
all [of the] materials | [close] scrutiny | refer [back] |
eradicate [completely] | merged [together] | during [the month of] May |
alongside [of] | combine [together] | revert [back] |
few [in number] | never [at any time] | each [and every] |
appreciate [in value] | depreciate [in value] | [separate] entities |
[foreign] imports | postponed [until later] | |
descend [down] |
Consistent use of terminology is a hallmark of drafting.c See, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 105 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 183-184 (2006); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 309-311 (2nd ed. 2003).
An experienced legislative drafter explains that:
Do not say: | Say: |
An owner of an automobile shall register the owner's car with the division. | An owner of a motor vehicle shall register the motor vehicle with the division. |
Do not say: | Say: |
A tank shall have a 10-gallon fuel tank. | A tank shall have a 10-gallon container of fuel. |
A legislative drafter should define a term carefully and then use the term consistently. Click here for further discussion on the drafting of definitions.
The law is to be drafted as if it is continuously in effect, which requires a legislative drafter to:
A statute continually "speaks" to the person reading the statute.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 103 (2006 ed.); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 351 (2nd ed. 2003). Therefore, a statute should be in the present indicative, not in the subjunctive; and in the present perfect, not in the future perfect.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 101 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 189 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 47-48 (2005); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction, 21:10 (6th ed. 2002 revision).
Do not say: | Say: |
A person who violates this part shall be guilty . . . If the director shall have been notified. . . |
A person who violates this part is guilty . . . If the director is notified . . . |
Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(d) provides that a word used in the present tense includes the future tense. In general there is no need to draft in any tense other than the present tense. One exception to this rule occurs in expressing time relationships.
If a time relationship must be expressed, present facts may be used in conjunction with past facts.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 189 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 47-48 (2005).
A person who has been convicted of a felony may not apply for a permit.
Combining present facts with future facts is generally not appropriate because the application of the law does not occur until the future fact, e.g., "A person who will commit a felony may not apply for a permit." This type of legislation has obvious difficulties.
Whenever possible, use the active voice rather than the passive voice.m See, e.g. , Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 188-189 (2006); National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 103 (2006 ed.); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 345 (2nd ed. 2003); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 44 (2005) ("The most important legislative drafting principle and the one upon which most of the others depend is the command to use the active voice."). A drafter's use of the active voice forces the drafter to name an actor as the subject of a sentence.c See, e.g., Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction , 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction , 21:7 (6th ed., 2007-08 Supp., 2002 revision).
Do not say: | Say: |
A board shall be appointed to enforce this chapter. | The governor shall appoint a board to enforce this chapter. |
A legislative drafter should not use the passive voice. Rare exceptions include a circumstance when:
Whenever possible, a legislative drafter should use an action verb instead of a participle, infinitive, gerund, or other noun or adjective verb form.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 190 (2006); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 68-69 (1996); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 46 (2005). An action verb is shorter and more direct.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 346-347 (2nd ed. 2003). Three rules that apply to the use of action verbs include:
Do not say: | Say: |
give consideration to give recognition to have knowledge of have need of is applicable make an appointment of make application make payment make provision for make a determination |
consider recognize know need applies appoint apply pay provide determine |
In addition to drafting in active voice and using basic, concrete verbs, a legislative drafter should write positively.c S ee, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 50-51 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 362 (2nd ed. 2003); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction , 21:9 (6th ed. 2002 revision). A drafter should avoid several negatives in one sentence.
Do not say: | Say: |
The director may not appoint members other than those with three years experience. | The director shall appoint members with at least three years experience. |
A statute should be in the present indicative, not in the subjunctive; and in the present perfect, not in the future perfect. A common mistake in drafting legislation:
Click below to see examples of how false imperatives can be changed to the indicative mood.
Do not say: | Say: |
Articles of incorporation shall be signed by each of the incorporators A certified copy of a contract shall be prima facie evidence The report shall be subject to examination by the commissioner Upon a proper showing, a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or extraordinary writ shall be granted |
Each incorporator shall sign the articles of incorporation A certified copy of a contract is prima facie evidence The commissioner may examine a report Upon a proper showing, the court shall grant a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or extraordinary writ |
A legislative drafter should generally draft in singular,c See, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 103 (2006 ed.); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 36-37 (2005). being careful to:
Do not say: | Say: | |
The division shall issue licenses to applicants qualified as doctors and nurses. |
(1) The division shall issue a license to an applicant who qualifies as a doctor. (2) The division shall issue a licence to an applicant who qualifies as a nurse. Unless you mean:
The division shall issue a license to an applicant who qualifies as both a doctor and a nurse.
|
The importance of drafting in the singular is discussed frequently in literature about legislative drafting. Three examples follow:
One author writes:
Another author writes:
Another author provides the following example as demonstrating the need to draft in the singular:
If the legislative intent is to have the statute only read in the singular, a legislative drafter should make that express in statutory language.
In a city of the first class, the mayor, a commissioner, the recorder, and the treasurer shall administer only one office under the city government, except that the offices of recorder and auditor may be held by one person.
Utah's construction statute provides that the singular includes the plural and the plural includes the singular.c See Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(b). A phrase like "person or persons" is unnecessary.
When drafting legislation, a legislative drafter should:
In the unusual case that a legislative drafter must use a compound word in its plural form, the drafter should follow the rule that the significant word takes the plural.c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 5.8 (2000).
Singular: | Plural: |
attorney general corporate counsel lieutenant governor notary public right-of-way |
attorneys general corporate counsels lieutenant governors notaries public rights-of-way |
In the Utah Code, a legislative drafter should use the term "attorney fees" and not "attorneys' fees," "attorney's fees," or "attorneys fees."m This pattern is consistent with how Utah courts and court rules cite to attorney fees. See, e.g., Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 73, Attorney fees; Gardner v. Board of County Comm'nrs, 178 P.3d 893 (Utah 2008).
How the word "fits" within the sentence is almost as important as its selection.m See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 188 (2006) ("Arrange your words with care. Word order affects meaning; it also affects readability."). Three examples of potential problems in the placement of words within a sentence are:
A legislative drafter should avoid placing qualifying language between the actor and the action or the action and the object or complement, because this "separates the working words of the sentence making it difficult for the reader to see the relationship between the actor, the action, and the object or complement. "c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 62 (2005).
Do not say: | Say: |
If more than one owner of assessed land seeks review, the court may, upon a showing that the reviews may be consolidated without injury to anyone's interests, consolidate the reviews and hear them together. | The court may consolidate two or more reviews and hear the reviews together if: (1) more than one owner of assessed land seeks review; and (2) there is a showing that the reviews may be consolidated without injury to anyone's interests. |
A legislative drafter should be careful to only modify a word that is intended to be modified. This can arise when a provision includes multiple items only some of which are to be modified.
Do not say: | Say: |
(1) A person may not own a reptile, a canine, or a feline defined as an endangered species under . . . . | (1) A person may not own: (a) a reptile; (b) a canine; or (c) a feline that is defined as an endangered species under . . . . |
Say:
(if you mean to modify all categories)(1) A person may not own any of the following that is defined as an endangered species under . . . : (a) a reptile; (b) a canine; or (c) a feline. |
Certain rules can assist a legislative drafter in the placement of modifiers.
A gender-based distinction is rarely appropriate and gender-neutral language should be used when possible.c See, e.g., United States Archives & Records Administration, Drafting Legal Documents, Principles of Clear Writing , Sec. 18, (2007); National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 104 (2006 ed.) ("Virtually all states draft legislation in a gender-neutral form."); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 39-41 (2005); The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.34, 5.41, 5.45, 5.222 (16th ed. 2010); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 10, 366-373 (2nd ed. 2003); Alabama Legislative Reference Service, Drafting Style Manual, Rule 4 (DATE); Alaska Legislative Affairs Agency, Manual of Legislative Drafting, p. 63 (2003); Arizona Legislative Council, Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual , p. 87 (2007); Arkansas Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual, p. 43-44 (2006); Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services, Legislative Drafting Manual , p. 11-6 - 11-10 (2003); Connecticut Legislative Commissioners' Office, Guide to Drafting Legislation, p. 12 (DATE); Kentucky Legislative Research Commission, Bill Drafting Manual , p. 20-21 (2004); Maine Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Maine Legislative Drafting Manual, Part III, Ch. 1, Sec. 14 (1998); Massachusetts Counsel to the Senate, Massachusetts Senate Legislative Drafting and Legal Manual , p. X (3d ed. 2003); Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Bill Drafting Manual , Sec. 10.33 (2002); Montana Legislative Services Division, Bill Drafting Manual, Sec. 2-11 (2004); North Dakota Legislative Council, 2007 Legislative Drafting Manual, p. 96 (2007); South Dakota Legislative Research Council, Legislative Drafting Manual , p. 23 (DATE); Texas Legislative Council, Drafting Manual, p. 97-98 (2006); Washington Code Reviser's Office, Bill Drafting Guide 2007, Part II, (11)(g) (2007). But see, West Virginia House Clerk's Office, Legislative Services, Senate Clerk's Office, Bill Drafting Manual , p. 27 (2006). However, Utah Code 68-3-12 provides that words in one gender comprehend the other gender.m See Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(c). Section 68-3-12 provides further that "man" or "men," used either alone or with other syllables, includes "woman" and "women."
A drafter should draft using gender-neutral language, unless only one gender is intended (such as in a statute relating to abortion, adoption, or parental rights). This policy fulfills the goal of clearly expressing the Legislature's intent in an accurate, non-discriminatory manner. A drafter should remove improper uses of gender-specific terms in existing code, or change the terms to gender-neutral terms. Words such as "he," "she," "his," "hers," "him," "her," "himself," or "herself" may not be used unless application to only one gender is intended or, as a last resort, in a phrase that refers to both genders like "himself or herself." A drafter may use the following methods to avoid the improper use of gender-specific terms. Remember that our ultimate goal is to produce a clear, well-drafted statute. Choose the method that best accomplishes this goal.
Instead of using "chairman," use "chair."
Instead of using "policeman," use "officer," "law enforcement officer," "police officer," or "peace officer."
Do not create gender-specific nouns that are not commonly understood in the English language. For example, use "manhole," not "personhole."
This is often the easiest and clearest way to avoid using gender-specific terms.
The director or officer shall certify that [he] the director or officer accurately reported the expenditure.
An individual who believes that another individual is not legally qualified to vote may challenge [his] the individual's right to vote by . . .
This method may not be the best method if the sentence requires the noun to be repeated so often that the sentence becomes cumbersome or difficult to understand.
A member may lose [his] membership if . . .
A person waives [his] the right to a trial if . . .
In this method, the drafter uses "who," "which," or "that" as the subject of the sentence to, by inference, relate to one or multiple verbs.
[If an] An applicant who is licensed in another state [, he] shall submit a verified application.
A person who manufactures, or [has in his possession] possesses a controlled substance in violation of this chapter is guilty of a first degree felony.
[If a] A person who is not authorized to conduct business under this chapter[, he] may not claim to be a certified specialist
[If the commissioner finds] Upon finding that the sampling frequency can be safely reduced, [he] the commissioner may order the frequency reduced in accordance with Subsection (2).
As a last resort, a drafter may refer to both genders. This should only be used if other methods are not possible or result in an unclear sentence. Use of this method is very rare, and usually only arises when the phrase "himself or herself" is used. On occasion, "himself or herself" can be replaced with "oneself," but, depending on the sentence, this can be awkward and is not always the best solution.
The following are examples of preferred gender-neutral terms.m See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.202 (15th ed. 2003) ("Chair is widely regarded as the best gender-neutral choice. Since the mid-seventeenth century, chair has referred to an office of authority.").
Do not say: | Say: |
brother, sister chairman clergyman committeeman daughter, son draftsman enlisted man ex-serviceman father, mother female, male, man, woman fireman fisherman foreman grandfather, grandmother husband, wife layman mailman manhours mankind manmade manpower policeman service man warehouseman widow, widower workman, working men |
sibling chair minister, member of the clergy committee member child, children drafter enlisted personnel veteran parent person, individual firefighter fisher supervisor grandparent spouse lay person mail carrier hours worked, worker hours humanity artificial, synthetic personnel, staff peace officer military personnel warehouse keeper surviving spouse worker, workers |
Because some legislative provisions occur frequently, specific language has evolved in drafting these provisions to encourage consistency with the Utah Code and legislation in general. A legislative drafter should follow these standard forms to maintain consistency and to reduce ambiguity in the Utah Code.
A title or chapter in the Utah Code should contain a codified titlem A "codified title" is a title created in a specific section of the Utah Code. An "uncodified introductory caption" means boldface or a name of a part that is printed within the Utah Code, but is not created in a specific section of the Utah Code. For example, "Part 1. General Provisions" is an uncodified introductory caption, but Utah Code 9-1-801 ("This part is known as the 'Commission on National and Community Service Act.'") is a codified introductory caption. to provide easy identification of the title or chapter. A part within a chapter that is lengthy and can stand alone should also have a codified title.
A title should be codified as the first section of the relevant title, chapter, or part. A legislative drafter should use the boldface description "Title" for the section creating the title.
The language of the codified section should indicate that the title, chapter, or part "is known as" and then state the actual title of the title, chapter, or part, within quotation marks. Click here for further discussion of titles.
58-63-101. Title.
This chapter is known as the "Security Personnel Licensing Act."
Legislative statements should rarely be included in a bill to effectuate a provision of the Utah Code.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 501 (2006 ed.) (with limited revisions); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 186 (2006) (explaining concerns with statements of purpose). There are narrow exceptions for legislative statements of intent that are related to the limited purposes of:
Inclusion of a legislative statement in a bill is discouraged for many reasons and a legislative statement should be included only for limited circumstances where there is a critical need to express the Legislature's intent.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 501 (2006 ed.) (with limited revisions); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 186 (2006) (explaining concerns with statements of purpose).
A well drafted bill ideally expresses legislative intent in the body of the bill itself, which makes a legislative statement unnecessary. Reasons why a legislative statement is not recommended include:
Redundancy: | A statement that mirrors the body of a bill is redundant and adds little clarification to the bill. |
Conflict: | If a statement is inconsistent with substantive provisions in a bill, it may cause more harm than good in later interpretations of the law. Moreover, if a statute accompanying a statement is later amended without amending the statement, the statement may not reflect the most current position of the Legislature. |
Ambiguity: | A statement that uses broad, undefined language creates ambiguity. |
Advocacy: | Language used in a statement may advocate the merits of a bill and lead to an interpretation by courts or administrative agencies that is broader or different than that intended by the Legislature. |
Unpredictability: | Undefined, promotional language in statements may lead to unforseen consequences. |
Abdication of Legislature's authority | A legislative statement invites judicial interpretation and allows the courts greater flexibility in interpreting statutes. |
Creation of right/duty/etc.: | Broad language in statements may be interpreted as creating a right or stating a legal principle rather than merely describing the circumstances that give rise to a bill. |
Lack of support: | It may be unclear whether there is factual or legal support for a statement. |
Change: | Circumstances, legal principles, and legislative goals or intent may change after passage of a statement. This reality would require constant review and updating of a statute, or lead to potential conflicts or inaccuracies. |
The Utah Supreme Court has held that, in construing legislation, a court's primary responsibility is to give effect to the intent of the Legislature.c See, e.g., Neel v. State, 889 P.2d 922, 925 (Utah 1995); Sullivan v. Scoular Grain Co. , 853 P.2d 877 , 879 (Utah 1993) superceded by statute as stated in Bishop v. Gen Tec, Inc., 48 P.3d 218 (Utah 2002). If a legislative statement is included in a bill, a court might use that statement to discern legislative intent.c See, e.g., Deseret News Publishing v. Salt Lake County , 182 P.3d 372 (Utah 2008) (see footnote 3). Because a legislative statement generally declares broad public policy objectives, a court may use a legislative statement to infer a legislative intent that is arguably not supported by the substantive provisions of the statute. In light of this risk, a legislative statement should be used only in limited circumstances, when the legislative statement may help a court or an implementing agency to determine the intent of the Legislature. These limited circumstances may include when a bill:
A legislative finding is of particular concern because it may include a statement of fact that is subject to change or a statement as to fact or other findings that suggest that the Legislature has made a study or in some other manner determined the accuracy of the "finding." Because of limited resources and time, the Legislature may not be able to conduct a study or other investigation that adequately supports a specific finding in connection with a bill.
However, in narrow circumstances a finding may serve a very specific need such as when a future court interpretation may require a legislative finding. For example, certain First Amendment cases addressing regulation of lewd behavior may look to whether there are legislative findings of secondary effects. In drafting legislative findings, a drafter should be careful to make the findings as narrow as possible and exclude, whenever possible, facts that are susceptible to frequent change.
A legislative drafter should always be carefull about unintentional interpretations. For example, although not intended by the Legislature, a finding might be interpreted to establish a right and consequently a liability to the state, e.g., the following could lead to a misinterpretation, "the Legislature finds that a child in the public schools is entitled to a child-to-teacher ratio of no more than 20 children per teacher."
If, after being informed of the risks associated with a legislative statement, a legislator insists on language related to legislative intent, purpose, or findings, a drafter can suggest at least two alternatives. In addition, a drafter is encouraged to consult with legislative general counsel for other options available under the specific circumstances of the relevant bill.
One alternative to a legislative statement is to have language read into the journal of each house as part of the official record of the Legislature (i.e. "spread upon the pages of the journa"), rather than including the legislative statement in the bill. In general, the language should include the number and title of the bill and a statement that the Legislature intends a certain interpretation or process, the Legislature makes certain findings, or that passage of the bill serves a specific purpose. Click here for examples of legislative intent statements read into the journal.
Another alternative to a legislative statement is to convert the statement from passive language to an active statutory mandate. For example, rather than stating that: "It is the intent of the Legislature that this section be interpreted narrowly." The goal could be achieved by stating that: "A court shall interpret this section narrowly."
Do not say: | Say: |
(e) It is the intent of the Legislature that the amendments to this Subsection (1) in this bill be interpreted as merely clarifying a principle that existed before the amendments to this bill, that an employee bears the burden of proving that the employee is permanently, totally disabled based on those factors listed as matters on which the commission is to make a conclusion in Subsection (1)(c), as enacted before the amendments of this bill. (3) The Legislature finds that a violation of Subsection (2) impairs or prevents fair competition, injures the public welfare, and constitutes unfair competition contrary to public policy and the policy of this chapter. The prohibition in Subsection (2) is intended to promote competition and to prevent market concentration. |
(e) The amendments to this Subsection (1) in this bill shall be interpreted as merely clarifying a principle that existed before the amendments in this bill, that an employee bears the burden of proving that the employee is permanently, totally disabled based on those factors listed as matters on which the commission is to make a conclusion in Subsection (1)(c), as enacted before the amendments of this bill. (3) A violation of Subsection (2) impairs or prevents fair competition, injures the public welfare, and promotes unfair competition contrary to public policy and this chapter. The division shall enforce Subsection (2) in a manner that promotes competition and prevents market concentration. |
Ambiguity may exist if a legislative statement includes both intent language and mandatory directives such as "It is the intent of the Legislature that [an agency] shall . . ." It may be helpful to convert the intent language to a description of the permissive or binding nature of the legislative provision.
Do not say: | Say: |
It is the intent of the Legislature that: (1) extending to 2010 the sunset date for Section 10-2-427 will give each county . . . . (2) each county of the first class and each municipality that is in a county of the first class and is adjacent to a township area shall, on or before July 1, 2018, provide appropriate public information and funding to conduct a survey . . .; and (3) each county of the first class and municipalities within each county of the first class that are adjacent to township areas shall work together to develop and, to the extent feasible, implement a plan to put into effect the results of the survey. |
(10) A sunset date of July 1, 2010, provides each county . . . . (11) A county of the first class and a municipality that is in a county of the first class and is adjacent to a township area [shall/is encouraged to/may]: (a) on or before July 1, 2018, provide appropriate public information and funding to conduct a survey . . .; and (b) work together to develop and, to the extent feasible, implement a plan to put into effect the results of the survey. |
In the limited circumstances when a legislative statement is included in a bill, the legislative statement should be drafted after the body of the bill has been written and should not become a "crutch" used to avoid resolving difficult substantive issues in the body of the bill. Substantive law belongs in the main body of the bill and not in the legislative statement.
The following principles should be considered in drafting a legislative statement:
A reference to a legislative statement and whether it is a statement of intent, purpose, or finding should generally be included in the long title of the bill under "Highlighted Provisions" and the boldface of the codified section.
In general, when a codified legislative statement applies to a title, chapter, or part, it should be placed in a section that immediately follows the title of the applicable title, chapter, or part and immediately precedes the definition section, if any. If a legislative statement applies only to a section, it should be the first subsection in that section. If a legislative statement applies to an entire bill that affects several provisions of the Utah Code, the composition of the bill should be considered to determine the placement of the legislative statement.
If a legislative statement applies to an action taken in a specific bill, the legislative statement should reference the bill or specific language in the bill that is to be impacted by the legislative statement. Because the legislative statement will then likely include a reference to "this bill" which might be difficult to track in subsequent years, the bill should also include revisor instructions directing the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to change the term "this bill" to the appropriate chapter reference in the Utah Code. The change described in the revisor instruction is completed at the time the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel prepares the Utah Code database for publication. Click here for further discussion of drafting revisor instructions.
A definition is frequently used in drafting to define a word that has a different meaning than the ordinary dictionary definition or to reduce the length of the legislation by providing a shorter word or phrase for a repetitious designation or phrase.m See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 70 (2005) which states: "One of the most useful tools of a legal drafter is the definition.. . . It avoids repetition and thereby reduces the number of words in [legislation]. It avoids inconsistency by defining the word only once. It aids in precision by not leaving it up to the reader to define the word. It also permits the drafter to control what a word means, and not leave it up to a dictionary." A definition can also be used to define the scope of a term in order to avoid ambiguity in the intended application of a legislative provision.
A definition is not necessary to define a common word that is used in its usual dictionary meaning.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 376 (2nd ed. 2003). When possible, a drafter should use a word in its common meaning rather than define a term and use it in an unusual way. If a word is used only once or infrequently it may be defined where it appears in the legislation.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 380-382 (2nd ed. 2003). When encouraging the use of definitions, an experienced legislative drafter notes that:
In contrast, another scholar warns that "[d]efinitions are powerful medicine and drafters should use them sparingly and with care. A badly drafted definition will infect every portion of the document where the term is used."c Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 375 (2nd ed. 2003). Although the positions are different, they both highlight the critical role of definitions. The following are examples of proper uses of definitions:
A definition can be an effective tool in drafting precise language. However, a definition should simply define a term and should not include a substantive prohibition, requirement, or authorization.c See, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 221 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 71 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 384-387 (2nd ed. 2003); Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 94-95 (1996); Dickerson, Materials on Legal Drafting , p. 226 (1981). If a substantive prohibition, requirement, or authorization related to a definition is necessary, a legislative drafter should consider placing the substantive provision in a separate section or subsection after all definitions are listed. Also, a definition should not be used to create a meaning that is significantly different than the generally understood meaning of a term.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 63 (2005).
Some terms are used so frequently or have such universal application throughout the Utah Code, that they are defined for purposes of the entire code.c Utah Code 68-3-12.5 A drafter should be aware of these generally defined terms, because they can impact the meaning of any changes to the Utah Code. If a drafter intends for a generally defined term to apply to a provision that the drafter is drafting, there is no need to refer to the general definition. In fact, this practice is discouraged because it invites confusion regarding whether a generally defind term applies in a portion of the code where no reference to the general definition is made. If a drafter desires a different definition for a generally defined term in a particular area of the code, the drafter must define the term differently in that particular area of the code, being careful to state which portion of the code that the altered definition apples to.
Following is a list of the terms that have been defined for the entire Utah Code:
Adjudicative proceeding | Land | Review commission |
Administrator | Month | Review council |
Advisory board | Oath | Road |
Advisory commission | Person | Signature |
Advisory council | Personal property | State |
County executive | Personal representative | Swear |
County legislative body | Policy board | Testify |
Depose | Policy commission | United States |
Executor | Policy council | Utah Code |
Guardian | Population | Vessel |
Highway | Process | Will |
Intellectual disability | Property | Writ |
Intermediate care facility | Real estate | Writing |
for people with an | Real Property | |
intellectual disability | Review board |
When drafting, it is important to be aware of terms that are already defined for the portion of the code that the drafter is adding to or changing. Failure to do this can result in the inadvertant use of a defined term that means something different than the drafter intends, or in the removal of a defined term that was used for an important purpose. Also, when changing a definiiton, the drafter should search the portion of the code that the definition applies to for each instance where that term is used. This helps ensure that the change does not affect the meaning of a code provision in a manner that is not intended.
Creating a new definiiton raises many of the same issues as changing an existing definition does. The drafter should search the portion of the code to which the definition will apply for each instance where the newly defined term is already used to ensure that the definition does not change the meaning of a code provision in a manner that is not intended.
In addition to not including substantive law in a definition, when drafting a definition, a legislative drafter should comply with the following form rules.
Do not say: | Say: |
"Agency" is as defined in Section 20A-11-101. | "Agency" has the same meaning as that term is defined in Section 20A-11-101. |
If a defined term is intended to be exclusive, i.e., have only one meaning, a legislative drafter should use the word "means."c See, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 301 (2006 ed.). The term "means" restricts a court or agency to the specific definition of the word. In drafting a definition, a legislative drafter must recognize that when the term "means" is used, the definition could be interpreted to exclude anything not expressly listed. This is the rule of construction known as "expressio unius est exclusio alterius," which means "expressing of one thing is the exclusion of another." A legislative drafter may avoid this construction by using the term "includes." If a definition is inclusive, a legislative drafter can use the word "includes," which allows a court or agency to adopt additional meanings.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 301 (2006 ed.). Do not use wordy, legalistic phrases such as "shall be deemed to include," "includes but is not limited to," or "means and includes." Utah Code Subsection 68-3-12(1)(f) makes it clear that the use of these phrases are uneccesary. Indeed, the use of the phrase "but not limited to" after "include," includes," or "including" is "strongly discouraged."c 68-3-12(2)(a)(iv)
Click here for discusssion of the use of the term "includes" as it relates to the statutory rule of construction that the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another.
Click here for discussion of the use of the term "includes" as it relates to the statutory rule of construction that "general words follow specific words."
Click here for additional discussion relating to the use of the term "includes."
See also, Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 221 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 70 (2005).
Occasionally, a transition or savings clause may be necessary to address various issues raised when enacting or modifying a Utah Code provision.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 603 (2006 ed.) (with limited revisions). Three examples include:
A recodification of a title, chapter, or part of the Utah Code generally raises the issue of the need for a transition or savings clause. Click here for a more detailed discussion of recodification.
A legislative drafter should generally codify a transition or savings clause. The primary purpose of codification is to provide greater notice to the general public. An uncodified section is not published in the same manner as a codified section, making it less accessible.
An exception to the rule that a transition or savings clause is to be codified is when the language affected by the clause is itself uncodified (e.g., an uncodified task force is being changed to another type of uncodified task force and there is a need to transition the membership from one to the other). Any other exception to this rule should be discussed with legislative general counsel before finalizing the bill.
A reference to a transition clause should be included in the long title of the bill under "Highlighted Provisions" and in the boldface of the codified section. A transition or savings clause is not a "special clause" for purposes of a long title. A transition or savings clause should be described in an introductory caption in the same manner as any other substantive code section.
In general, when a codified transition or savings clause applies to a title, chapter, or part, it should be placed in a section at the end of the title, chapter, or part with the transition or savings clause preceding a severability clause. Whether a transition or savings clause should be in a stand-alone section or merged with other provisions depends on the context and the ease of access. If the transition or savings clause applies only to a section, it should be the last subsection in the section with the transition or savings clause preceding a severability clause. If a transition clause applies to an entire bill that affects multiple provisions of the Utah Code, placement is determined on the basis of the circumstances of the bill.
There is no standardized language for a transition or savings clause because it is so dependent on the substance of the relevant bill. However, the following may be helpful in drafting transition clauses.
A transition clause that clarifies application generally includes:
30-6a-111. Transitional provision.
This chapter applies to:
(1) a protection order issued before July 1, 2016;
(2) a continuing action for enforcement of a foreign protection order commenced before July 1, 2016; and
(3) a request for enforcement of a foreign protection order made on or after July 1, 2016, for violation of a foreign protection order occurring before July 1, 2016.
A transition clause that phases in implementation generally includes:
13-33-305. Transition of licenses.
(1) A license that was issued by the Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing under Title 58, Chapter 66, Utah Professional Boxing Regulation Act, before July 1, 2011, and in effect on June 30, 2011:
(a) is considered a valid license under this chapter until the expiration date indicated on the license;
(b) is subject to this chapter, including a provision relating to a disciplinary action against the licensee; and
(c) may not be renewed under Title 58, Occupations and Professions.
(2) Upon the expiration of a license described in Subsection (1), a person desiring to continue licensure in the profession shall meet the same requirements as those required for new licensure under Section 13-33-301.
In addition to the provisions discussed above, a legislative drafter should consider whether to include an automatic repeal date for a transition or savings provision. With an automatic repeal date, when a transition or savings provision is no longer needed, it can removed from the Utah Code without the need for legislation.
Click here for a more detailed discussion of repeal dates.
Click here for additional examples of transition or savings clauses.
If a transition or savings clause refers to "this bill" or "the effective date of this bill" in describing to what the clause applies, a legislative drafter must include a revisor instruction in the bill. The revisor instruction permits the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to change the reference to "this bill" to the appropriate cite in the Utah Code or to use the actual effective date. Click here for further discussion of revisor instructions.
The need for, and treatment of, a transition or savings clause when amending the Utah Constitution, legislative rules, and court rules of procedure and evidence raise additional issues to those raised when amending the Utah Code. A drafter should consult with legislative general counsel in resolving these issues. The following general principles may be helpful.
Utah Constitution: | If a transition or savings clause is needed, it generally should be included in the resolution passed by the Legislature, but not in the actual language of the Utah Constitution. The clause should be discussed in the voter information pamphlet. |
Legislative rules: | The need for, and treatment of a transition clause should be handled on a case-by-case basis. |
Court rules of procedure and evidence: | In general, if a transition clause is needed, it should be included in the actual language of the rule. |
Utah does not have a general severability statute addressing whether a Utah Code provision is to be "severed" if a court finds a portion of the law unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Case law suggests that courts look to whether the statute is operable and furthers the legitimate legislative purpose without the offending provision, and have considered whether the Legislature would have enacted the statute without the offending provision.c See, e.g., Midvale City Corp. v. Haltom, 73 P.3d 334 (Utah 2003); Gallivan v. Walker , 54 P.3d 1069 (Utah 2002). Because there is no bright-line test as to when to include a severability clause, a drafter should be flexible in advising a sponsor as to when to include a severability clause in light of the issues surrounding the bill.
If a sponsor requests that a severability clause be included, a legislative drafter may specify that, if any part of a bill is held invalid, the Legislature intends that the offending provision be severed and the "valid" portions retained. Conversely, if the Legislature wants the entire enactment to stand or fall together, a drafter may specify that the entire law will fail if any part of it is held invalid. If a bill is particularly controversial or there is a greater risk that a court may not sever a bill because of the structure of the bill, a drafter may wish to make the severability clause more detailed than other general severability clauses.
A severability clause in a bill should be codified to provide greater notice to the general public. An uncodified section is not published in the same manner as a codified section, making it less accessible, especially to someone using the Utah Code Unannotated. An exception to this rule is when the language affected by the clause is itself uncodified. Any other exception to this rule should be discussed with legislative general counsel before finalizing the bill.
A reference to a severability clause should be included in the long title of the bill under "Highlighted Provisions" and the boldface of the codified section. A severability clause is not a special clause for purposes of a long title. A severability clause should be described in an introductory caption in the same manner as any other substantive code section.
In general, if a codified severability clause applies to a title, chapter, or part, it should be placed in a section at the end of the title, chapter, or part, with any transition clause preceding the severability clause. Whether a severability clause should be in a stand-alone section or merged with other provisions depends on the context and the ease of access. If the severability clause applies only to a section, it should be the last subsection in the section with any transition clause preceding the severability clause. If a severability clause applies to an entire bill that affects multiple provisions of the Utah Code, placement is determined on the basis of the composition of the bill.
There is no standardized language for a severability clause because it is so dependent on the substance of the relevant bill. However, the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel has prepared basic language that can serve as a beginning point:
Providing for Severability: | XX-X-XX. Severability clause. If any [provision/chapter/part/section/subsection] of this [title/chapter/part/section] or the application of any [provision/chapter/part/section/subsection] to any person or circumstance is held invalid [by a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction], the remainder of this [title/chapter/ part/section] shall be given effect without the invalid [provision/chapter/part/section/subsection] or application. The provisions of this [title/chapter/part/section] are severable. |
Inseverability: | XX-X-XX. Inseverability clause -- Severability not permitted. If any [provision/chapter/part/section/subsection] of this [title/chapter/part/section] or the application of any [provision/chapter/part/section/subsection] to any person or circumstance is held invalid [by a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction], the remainder of this [title/chapter/ part/section] may not be given effect without the invalid [provision/chapter/part/section/subsection] or application. The provisions of this [title/chapter/part/section] may not be severed.m For a discussion of possible legal issues raised by an "inseverability clause," see Kameny, Are Inseverability Clauses Constitutional? , 68 Alb. L. Rev. 997 (2005). |
10-1-113. Severability clause.
If any chapter, part, section, or subsection of this [title/chapter/part], or the application of this [title/chapter/part] is held to be invalid, the remainder of this [title/chapter/part] is not affected by the invalidation.
31A-27-411. Severability clause.
If any provision of this chapter or its application to any person or circumstance is found to be unconstitutional, or in conflict with or superseded by the federal Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, 11 U.S.C. Sec. 101 et seq., as amended, the remainder of the chapter and the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected by the finding.
If a severability clause refers to "this bill" or "the effective date of this bill" in describing to what the clause applies, a legislative drafter must include a revisor instruction in the bill. The revisor instruction permits the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to change the reference to "this bill" to the appropriate cite in the Utah Code and to use the actual effective date. Click here for further discussion of revisor instructions.
The need for, and treatment of a severability clause when amending the Utah Constitution, legislative rules, and court rules of procedure and evidence raise additional issues to those raised when amending the Utah Code. A drafter should consult with legislative general counsel in resolving these issues. The following general principles may be helpful.
Utah Constitution: | A severability clause is rarely appropriate. |
Legislative rules: | A severability clause is rarely needed. |
Court rules of procedure and evidence: | In general, if a severability clause is needed, it should be included in the actual language of the rule. |
Click here for a discussion of the constitutional or other legal requirements related to an effective date or retrospective operation. The following provides general formats for drafting a delayed, early, or immediate effective date for a bill or resolution.
If legislation is to have an effective date later than the standard 60 days after the legislative session, it is often referred to as having a "delayed effective date."
A delayed effective date that extends beyond the next general session is strongly discouraged because a delayed effective date creates a section with two histories and two different effective dates that must be addressed in future drafting.
Click here for information regarding issues raised by amending a section with a delayed effective date.
Section 3. Effective date.
This bill takes effect on July 1, 2017.
If it is desirable or necessary for legislation to take effect before the 60-day standard, an early effective date can be included in the legislation. An early effective date is valid only if the bill is passed by a constitutional two-thirds vote of both houses (50 members in the House and 20 members in the Senate) (Utah Constitution, Article VI, Section 25). If the bill passes by a majority of both houses, but is short of the two-thirds requirement, the bill takes effect on the later date specified in the bill (if that date is at least 60 days after the last day of the session), or if there is not another date specified, the bill takes effect 60 days after the last day of the session.
Other Special Clauses:
This bill provides a special effective date.
Section 5. Effective date.
If approved by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, this bill takes effect on April 1, 2015.
If a bill is to be effective as soon as possible, an immediate effective date must be included in the legislation. As with an early effective date, an immediate effective date is valid only if the bill is passed by a constitutional two-thirds vote of both houses (50 members in the House and 20 members in the Senate) (Utah Constitution, Article VI, Section 25). If the bill passes by a majority of both houses, but is short of the two-thirds requirement, the bill takes effect on the later date specified in the bill (if that date is at least 60 days after the last day of the session), or if there is not another date specified, the bill takes effect 60 days after the last day of the session.
A bill with an immediate effective date that passes by a constitutional two-thirds vote of both houses is in effect:
Other Special Clauses:
This bill provides a special effective date.
Section 7. Effective date.
If approved by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, this bill takes effect upon approval by the governor, or the day following the constitutional time limit of Utah Constitution, Article VII, Section 8, without the governor's signature, or in the case of a veto, the date of veto override.
A bill takes effect 60 days after the last day of the legislative session unless the Legislature provides for a different effective date.c Utah Constitution, Article VI, Section 25
Except in the case of a concurrent resolution or a resolution to amend the Utah Constitution, a resolution takes effect when it receives final approval from the appropriate legislative body. See JR4-1-302. A concurrent resolution takes effect on the day the governor signs the resolution. A constitutional resolution does not take effect until approved by the voters of the state.
At times, different sections of a bill must take effect on different dates. If this is necessary, a legislative drafter should state the effective date of each section of the bill to prevent future coordination problems. Separate dates can be used with either an immediate, early, or delayed effective date.
Other Special Clauses:
This bill provides a special effective date.
Section 14. Effective date.
This bill takes effect on May 12, 2015, except that the amendments to Section 31A-2-104 in this bill take effect on July 1, 2015.
Other Special Clauses:
This bill provides a special effective date.
Section 31. Effective date.
If approved by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, this bill takes effect upon approval by the governor, or the day following the constitutional time limit of Utah Constitution, Article VII, Section 8, without the governor's signature, or in the case of a veto, the date of veto override, except that the amendments to Sections 34A-2-102, 34A-2-104, and 34A-2-111 in this bill take effect on January 1, 2016.
When drafting an effective date clause with split effective dates, always put the earliest effective date first, even if the later date applies to more sections than the earlier date (exceptions to this may be approved by the general counsel). While this may result in a situation where the stated default effective date only applies to one section and a later effective date applies to several sections, it is necessary in order to ensure that the office's computer software correctly populates the conflicts and update tables.
Other Special Clauses:
This bill provides a special effective date.
Section 5. Effective date.
(1) Except as provided in Subsection (2), this bill takes effect on May 12, 2015.
(2) The actions affecting the following sections take effect on January 1, 2016:
(a) Section 55-5-101;
(b) Section 55-5-102;
(c) Section 55-5-201;
(d) Section 55-5-202;
(e) Section 55-5-301; and
(f) Section 55-5-302;
If a bill amends a section that has not yet taken effect, an amendment made to that section should take effect no sooner than the date on which the section takes effect. This generally requires an effective date that clarifies the effective date of the section and the effective date for the remainder of the bill.
Section 54. Effective date.
This bill takes effect on May 6, 2015, except that the amendments to Section 31A-23-202 (Effective 07/01/15) take effect on July 1, 2015.
Contingent effective dates are typically found in Resolutions proposing to amend the Utah Constitution. However, there are rare occasions where a contingent effective date may apply to a regular bill. As with other effective dates, if the effective date is specific then include the date in the long title.
This bill provides a special effective date.
This bill takes effect January 1, 2016, if the amendment to the Utah Constitution proposed by H.J.R. 2, Joint Resolution on Property Tax Exemption for Water Facilities, 2015 General Session, passes the Legislature and is approved by a majority of those voting on it at the next regular general election.
This bill provides a special effective date.
This bill takes effect when states cumulatively possessing a majority of the electoral votes have enacted the agreement under Section 20A-13-401 in substantially the same form and the enactments by the states have taken effect in each state. The lieutenant governor shall inform the Legislature in writing of the date this bill takes effect in accordance with this section.
A bill may also contain a repeal date. In general, a repeal date should be codified in either Utah Code, Title 63I, Chapter 1 , Legislative Oversight and Sunset Act, or Title 63I, Chapter 2 , Repeal Dates by Title. A repeal date should be uncodified only if it applies to uncodified material.
Do not say: | Say: |
Section 3. Repeal date. This bill is repealed on July 1, 2016. |
Section 3. Section 63I-2-110, is amended to read: 63I-2-110. Repeal dates -- Title 10. (1) Section 10-2-107 is repealed July 1, 2013. (2) Section 10-5-131 is repealed July 1, 2016. |
If a sponsor requests that a statute be reviewed before repeal, the repeal date for the statute is to be inserted into Title 63I, Chapter 1 , Legislative Oversight and Sunset Act. This chapter provides the opportunity for a legislative review before the date set for repeal. Chapter 1, Part 1 sets out the process for the review, and Part 2 contains the repeal dates organized by title. Title 63I, Chapter 1, Part 2 is structured so that a repeal date appears in the section numbered to reflect the number of the title where the provision being repealed is located, e.g., for Title 58 - Section 63I-1-258.
If a legislative sponsor requests that a statute be repealed without requiring a formal sunset review, a legislative drafter should codify the repeal date in Title 63I, Chapter 2 , Repeal Dates by Title. Title 63I, Chapter 2 is structured so that a repeal date appears in the section numbered to reflect the number of the title where the provision being repealed is located, e.g., for Title 58 - Section 63I-2-258. By codifying the repeal date, it is easier for the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to locate the repealer in maintaining the Utah Code database.
Because Title 63I, Chapter 1 , Legislative Oversight and Sunset Act, and Title 63I, Chapter 2 , Repeal Dates by Title, are structured so that the section numbers reflect the title to which the repeal date applies, it is important to preserve each section listed by title. Therefore, in a circumstance where there is only one subsection in a section and a legislative drafter is asked to delete that subsection, the drafter should delete the language from the section and not repeal the section. By not repealing the section entirely, the section remains available so that repeal dates for that title can be codified in the future.
Although repeal dates should generally be codified, if a bill contains uncodified material that is to be repealed on a specific date, a repeal date should be included at the end of the bill as a special clause that follows the effective date, if any. The most common example of when an uncodified repeal date should be used is in a bill creating a legislative task force.
In drafting an uncodified repeal date, the term "bill" should be used in a repeal date only if the entire bill is to be repealed. Otherwise, a legislative drafter should specifically state the provision that is subject to repeal in the repeal clause.
When amending an uncodified repeal or effective date, it is critical that the amendment clearly state what provisions of uncodified material are affected.
Section 28. Laws of Utah 2014, Chapter 317, Uncodified Section 2, is amended to read:
Section 2. Effective date.
This bill takes effect on July 1, [2015]2016.
Although this issue does not arise when a repeal date for codified material is itself codified, if repealing a specific uncodified repeal date, the bill should state the impact of the repealer by specifically listing which statutes' repealers are being eliminated. This occurs rarely since codified material is normally repealed in Title 63I, Oversight.
Section 17. Repealer.
This bill repeals:
Laws of Utah 2014, Chapter 195, Uncodified Section 12, Repeal Date. This uncodified section affects: Sections 63-88-101 and 63-88-102.
Click here for a discussion of legal issues raised regarding the appropriateness of requiring legislation to be applied retrospectively. If the legislative sponsor requests that a law be applied retrospectively and it is constitutional to do so, a legislative drafter should consider including a special clause calling for retrospective application of an entire bill or some portion of a bill. A retrospective operation provision may also be combined with a specific effective date.
Section 3. Retrospective operation.
This bill has retrospective operation for a taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2014.
Section 10. Effective date -- Retrospective operation.
(1) If approved by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, this bill takes effect upon approval by the governor, or the day following the constitutional time limit of Utah Constitution, Article VII, Section 8, without the governor's signature, or in the case of a veto, the date of veto override.
(2) This bill has retrospective operation for a taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2014.
Although a drafter should avoid using the term "bill" or "effective date" in statute, at times it is unavoidable. When those terms must be used, a legislative drafter must include a revisor instruction in the legislation directing the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to change the term to the appropriate chapter reference in the Utah Code or to the specific effective date. This change can be done at the time the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel prepares the Utah Code database for publication pursuant to revisor instructions. A revisor instruction should be reviewed by the supervisor of the document technicians, who is primarily responsible for preparing the Utah Code database for publication.
A revisor instruction is similar to a coordinating clause, except that it directs the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to make certain technical changes to a single piece of legislation as opposed to coordinating multiple bills.
Section 3. Revisor instructions.
The Legislature intends that the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, in preparing the Utah Code database for publication, replace the reference in Subsection 75-7-302(18)(b) from "this bill" to the bill's designated chapter number in the Utah Code.
Section 5. Revisor instructions.
The Legislature intends that the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, in preparing the Utah Code database for publication, shall change the numbering of the sections enacted by this bill from Title 63D, Chapter 2 to Title 13, Chapter 34.
Click here for more examples of revisor instructions.
Occasionally, a drafter is asked to ensure that a dollar amount fixed in statute changes over time in relation to the economy or other factors. One way of accomplishing this is to provide for the amount to be adjusted in relation to a percentage change in the consumer price index. When drafting this type of provision, a drafter should determine whether the legislator wants the amount to be adjusted only upwards, only downwards, or both.
Providing for an upward or downward adjustment:
(3) (a) As used in this Subsection (3), "consumer price index" has the meaning described in Section (1)(f)(4), Internal Revenue Code, and defined in Section (1)(f)(5), Internal Revenue Code.
(b) Beginning on January 1, 2016, the lieutenant governor shall, on an annual basis, increase or decrease the dollar amounts described in this section by a percentage equal to the percentage difference between the consumer price index for the preceding calendar year and the consumer price index for calendar year 2014, rounded to the nearest whole dollar.
(4) (a) As used in this Subsection (4), "consumer price index" has the meaning described in Section (1)(f)(4), Internal Revenue Code, and defined in Section (1)(f)(5), Internal Revenue Code.
(b) Except as provided in Subsection (4)(c), on the first day of every even-numbered calendar year, beginning on January 1, 2016, the minimum wage and the cash wage obligation shall increase by a percentage equal to the percentage difference between the average of the Consumer Price Index for the two preceding calendar years and the Consumer Price Index for calendar year 2013.
(c) If the percentage difference described in Subsection (4)(b) is negative, the minimum wage and the cash wage obligation do not change.
(2) (a) As used in this Subsection (4), "consumer price index" has the meaning described in Section (1)(f)(4), Internal Revenue Code, and defined in Section (1)(f)(5), Internal Revenue Code.
(b) (i) The commission shall increase or decrease the dollar amount described in Subsection (1) by a percentage equal to the percentage difference between the consumer price index for the preceding calendar year and the consumer price index for calendar year 2008; and
(ii) after making an increase or decrease under Subsection (2)(b)(i), round the dollar amount to the nearest whole dollar.
Providing for an upward adjustment only:
(3) (a) As used in this Subsection (3), "consumer price index" has the meaning described in Section (1)(f)(4), Internal Revenue Code, and defined in Section (1)(f)(5), Internal Revenue Code.
(b) For a calendar year beginning on or after January 1, 2015, the commission shall increase the dollar amount described in Subsection (2) by a percentage equal to the percentage difference between the consumer price index for the preceding calendar year and the consumer price index for calendar year 2013, rounded to the nearest $100 increment.
(c) If, for a calendar year, the percentage difference between the consumer price index for the preceding calendar year and the consumer price index for calendar year 2013 is zero or a negative percentage, the consumer price index increase for the current calendar year is zero.
This chapter provides legislative drafting style guidelines that enable a drafter to avoid ambiguity and to write in "plain English." Most of these guidelines are derived from generally accepted style and usage manuals - others are common sense. If this manual does not address an issue of style or usage, the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel also uses as guides in drafting for the Legislature: The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed. 2010), the Webster's Third New International Dictionary, and the abridgment, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary .
Punctuation is an important part of legislation and should be used properly and uniformly.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 197-198 (2006). A drafter should know the rules of punctuation as well as the drafter knows the rules of construction and the format of legislation. Because courts look to the legislation as written to ascertain legislative intent, punctuation must be accurate.c See, e.g., Department of Natural Resources v. Huntington-Cleveland Irrigation Co. , 52 P.3d 1257 (Utah 2002).
A legislative drafter should follow generally accepted, standard rules of punctuation in drafting legislation. A legislative drafter may also come across punctuation that does not conform to the following rules. A legislative drafter should conform existing statutes to proper paragraphing style if the technical changes do not cloud the meaning of the proposed legislation.
Next to a comma, a colon or semicolon is perhaps the most overused or misused punctuation in drafting. The following are basic rules that should be followed in using a colon:
The following are basic rules that should be followed in using semicolons.
The most common proper use of a semicolon in legislative drafting is at the end of each segment of an enumerated list containing dependent clauses or incomplete sentences.
(1) A person does not commit an offense under this section if the person:
(a) receives a certificate of authority under Subsection (2); and
(b) displays the certificate of authority at the person's principal place of business.
A drafter should not write a list in which a sentence is attached to a phrase or clause. If there is only one inserted sentence, a legislative drafter can move the sentence to the end of the list or convert the sentence into a dependent clause. It may be necessary to turn the list into a list of sentences so that the inserted sentence can directly follow the item it explains.
Click here for an example.
Unless there is a single definition at the beginning of a section, a definition should be drafted as a complete sentence introduced by a dependent clause regardless of whether the definition is placed in a separate section or in a subsection of a section.
Click here for further discussion of the format of a definition.
49-1-103. Definitions.
As used in this title:
(1) "Employer" means the state.
(2) "Office" means the State Retirement Office.
63A-6-106. Subscription by state agencies and institutions.
(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Telecommunications" means the transmission or reception of signs, signals, writing, . . .
58-9-603. Loss of right of disposition.
(1) As used in this section, "estranged" means a physical and emotional separation . . .
In addition to use in a series, a semicolon is used in drafting to separate paragraphs of a resolution beginning with "WHEREAS," except that the last paragraph ends in a colon.
In traditional legal writing, a semicolon is also used to separate two main clauses that are not joined by a conjunction, or elements, such as items in a series, which themselves contain commas. These uses in legislative drafting should be extremely rare.
It is usually clearer to use separate sentences than to combine ideas using a semicolon.c See Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 69-70 (2005). For this same reason, a drafter should avoid using a proviso including the phrase "provided, however" or "provided, further."m Click here for further discussion of the use of provisos.
A legislative drafter inserts a comma to separate a series of words, phrases, or clauses. When used properly, a comma is a useful drafting tool. However, the overuse or incorrect use of commas is a common error in drafting. A legislative drafter should observe two general rules:
In addition to the general rules, a legislative drafter should use the following specific rules.
Use a comma to separate words and phrases in a series, including the word or phrase immediately before the conjunction.m See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules , Rule 107 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 198 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 68 (2005); The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.14 (16th ed. 2010); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 304-306 (2nd ed. 2003); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction, 21:15 ( 6th ed., 2007-08 Supp. 2002 revision,); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.42 (2000). The Chicago Manual of Style 5.198 (16th ed. 2010) describes "or" as a disjunctive conjunction. This is known as a "serial" comma.
Data obtained pursuant to this chapter is not subject to a civil, criminal, judicial, administrative, or legislative proceeding.
The department shall participate with local government agencies in the development of a health statistics system, the production of comparable and uniform health information, and the implementation of health-related policies.
Use a comma between adjectives preceding a noun that are coordinating, qualifying words.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 6.33 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.37 (2000).
The budget document shall be a brief, simple, uniform report.
Use a comma to set off nonrestrictive appositives. These are nouns or pronouns placed next to other nouns or pronouns that add nonessential details about the noun or pronoun.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.23 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.40 (2000).
The director, who is appointed by the governor, shall keep and maintain a record.
The governor, the chief executive of the state, shall speak annually to the Legislature.
Use a comma to set off a nonrestrictive adjective clause. This is a clause that describes but does not limit the meaning of something.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.22 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.40 (2000).
The county treasurer shall transfer from the fund account, which contains revenues from the fees collected, $150,000 to the General Fund.
Do not use a comma to set off a restrictive adjective clause.c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.40 (2000). This is a clause that is needed to make the meaning clear. "Which" is used when a relative clause conveys additional information or is parenthetical. "That" is used when the clause is restrictive.
Click here for further discussion of how to use "that" and "which."
Use a comma between the parts of a compound sentence when punctuation is needed for clarity or to provide an additional idea. A compound sentence contains two or more independent clauses connected by a conjunction.c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.34 (2000).
The division shall fund the program from its general operations budget, but it may not expend less than $100,000 on the program.
If a dependent clause or introductory phrase precedes an independent clause, a comma is not needed after the dependent clause or introductory phrase.
The person who serves as the executive secretary of the commission may hire additional clerical assistance as necessary.
Normal usage permits placing a comma before a conjunction that connects two independent clauses, each having a subject and a predicate.c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.43 (2000). Often, however, an independent clause is sufficiently long to justify making it a separate sentence. In this case, use two separate sentences rather than two independent clauses connected by a comma, because the use of two independent clauses makes the sentence too long and difficult to follow.c See Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 68-69 (2005).
Do not say: | Say: |
The board shall select one of its members as chair, but if that member is not a legislator, that member may not serve more than one consecutive term. | (1) The board shall select one of its members as chair. (2) If the member selected as chair is not a legislator, that member may not serve more than one consecutive term. |
The director shall be the administrative head of the Division of Wildlife Resources and shall be a person experienced in administration and the protection of wildlife. | (1) The director is the administrative head of the Division of Wildlife Resources. (2) The director shall be a person experienced in administration and the protection of wildlife. |
Do not use a comma to separate the parts of a compound sentence if the clauses are short and closely related.
The director is the head of the division and shall be experienced in administration.
Do not use a comma between the verbs of a compound predicate. This is a simple sentence that contains two or more verbs with the same subject.
The governor shall appoint a chair who is a member of the board and licensed under this chapter.
Use a comma to set off an introductory or transitional word or phrase.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.35 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.38 (2000). This would include after an introductory participial or absolute phrase.
In the case of an emergency, the governor may . . .
After the votes are counted, the election judge shall seal the election pouch.
Do not use a comma to set off restrictive participial phrases. This is a phrase that is essential to the meaning of the sentence.
A person seeking to practice in Utah shall apply with the division for a license.
Use a comma to set off a contrasted word or phrase.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.40 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.41 (2000).
A majority of the members shall set a meeting of the commission, not the chair.
Use a comma to indicate that qualifying language applies to all of a preceding clause. However, it may be preferable to place the qualifying language first.c See Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 68 (2005).
The division may receive additional information from an applicant in writing or by oral testimony, unless the division decides that the information is duplicative.
If the day of the month is stated in a date, use a comma before and after the year.c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.49 (2000).
This bill takes effect on July 1, 2012, and is repealed on June 30, 2014.
A comma is not needed if the day is omitted.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.45 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.50 (2000).
July 2015
Click here for further discussion on dates.
Use a comma to set off figures in groups of four or more numerals.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.55 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.48 (2000).
1,000,000
1,500
Use a comma to set off words, phrases, and clauses that would otherwise be unclear.
Do not say: | Say: |
When I was to begin the speech ended. | When I was to begin, the speech ended. |
Avoid parentheses except for use in a table or chart. In general, a word or phrase should be set off by commas rather than by parentheses.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 107 (2006 ed.).
Use an apostrophe to indicate only the possessive, either in the singular or plural, as in "director's" or "workers'." If a noun is a compound term, the word nearest to the object being possessed should end in a possessive.c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style, 7.23 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual , Rule 8.4 (2000).
attorney general's decision
the Speaker of the House's motion
When you have two or more items in a series, which items end in a possessive depends on whether the items are so closely linked that they would be considered a unit. If the nouns are considered a single unit, only the last noun takes the possessive form. If the nouns are independent, each noun should take the possessive form.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 7.22 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual , Rule 8.5 (2000).
the commission and division's joint agreement to . . .
the commission's or division's finding that . . .
Do not use contractions, such as "can't" and "doesn't." Do not confuse "its" with "it's" or "whose" with "who's."c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.8 (2000).
Although generally within the discretion of a legislative drafter, a hyphen should be used sparingly in drafting.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 75 (2005); Alaska Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual , p. 80 (2007). The most important consideration in determining whether to hyphenate is clarity.
Click here for guidelines on hyphenation.
Click here for information on hyphenation of a number.
A hyphen is used in a period of time that is expressed in either Arabic numerals or spelled out to begin a sentence. However, a hyphen is not used when referring to an actual number of hours, days, weeks, etc.
60-day period
Three-week period
. . . within 30 days after the day on which . . .
With some exceptions, a compound word formed with a prefix is generally spelled as one word without a hyphen. A hyphen is used after a prefix if the prefix:
Compound words can be closed (one word), open (two words without a hyphen), or hyphenated and are ever changing, requiring flexibility in the rules that apply to compound words.c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 7.77-7.85 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 6.1-6.3 (2000). Examples of closed compound words used in drafting are "policymaking" and "rulemaking." Use hyphens in compound adjectives if there is a risk of ambiguity.c See, e.g ., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual , Rule 6.4 (2000). However, do not hyphenate a compound adjective if the first word ends in "ly."c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 7.82 (16th ed. 2010).
ready-made
readily available
The following are examples of compound words that should or should not be hyphenated. The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed. 2010) provides detail on hyphenating a compound word.m Another resource available to a legislative drafter is United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Chapter 6, Compounding, Chapter 7, Compounding Examples (2000).
When a hyphen is preferred:
|
When a hyphen is not required:
|
consumer-related problem | child placement services |
habit-forming drug | interest free loan |
part-time employee | last known address |
right-of-way | low income housing unit |
state-owned property | parent time |
tax-supported universities | third party complainant |
In general, a word that is not a compound word is not hyphenated.
As a general rule, a legislative drafter should use quotation marks in only the following three situations.
Use quotation marks to enclose a term when being defined. Do not use quotation marks again to enclose a defined term in the body of the statute.
"Department" means the Department of Commerce.
The executive director of the department shall . . .
Use quotation marks to enclose a title at the beginning of a Title, Chpater, or Part. However, as with a definition, quotation marks should be used only in the original reference.
This chapter is known as the "Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act."
In accordance with Title 63G, Chapter 4, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, . . .
Use quotation marks to enclose the contents of a quote, form, sign, or label.
The ballot at an election on a proposal to change the municipality's form of government shall:
(1) state the ballot question substantially as follows: "Shall (state the municipality's name), Utah change its form of government to the (state "council-mayor form, with a five-member council," "council-mayor form, with a seven-member council," "six-member council form," or "five-member council form," as applicable)?"; and
(2) provide a space or method for the voter to vote "yes" or "no."
Punctuation is placed outside quotation marks, except for a period or comma, which is placed inside quotation marks.c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 8.141 (2000). However, when describing a form, sign, or label, a period or comma that is not part of the form, sign, or label should also be placed outside quotation marks.
. . . the word or phrase "Utah," or "United States," and words used in conjunction with them such as "United States Government";
A manufacturer shall label a flavoring container "flavorings".
For additonal information on punctiation within quotation marks, see The Chicago Manual of Style , 6.9, 6.10 (16th ed. 2010).
Do not use brackets in legislative drafting except to indicate deleted material.c See National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 107 (2006 ed.). Brackets found in the Utah Code, not those found in a bill, indicate a compiler's note and usually identify a misspelled or omitted word. A legislative drafter should correct an error if the drafter comes across it while drafting.
Except for a long title, new language in a bill is underlined, regardless of whether the language is added by amending, enacting, repealing and reenacting, or renumbering and amending. Other use of underlining should not be used due to the obvious confusion that would result.
As with punctuation, a drafter should not overuse capitalization. A legislative drafter should use the following capitalization rules.
The following should be capitalized:
The following should not be capitalized:
A drafter should always spell out a number if it begins a sentence.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.5 (16th ed. 2010). If a number greater than 100 appears at the beginning of a sentence, it is always expressed in words and a legislative drafter should not include the word "and" between the numbers.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.5 (16th ed. 2010) (The Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel elects to omit the "and.").
Do not say: | Say: |
One hundred and fifteen people attended. | One hundred fifteen people attended. |
(1) 10 years following. . . | Ten years following. . . |
within: (a) ten years | within: (a) 10 years |
When a number is spelled out, it should not be followed by a numeral in parentheses.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 340 (2nd ed. 2003).
Do not say: | Say: |
Twenty-nine (29) | Twenty-nine |
A number that is spelled out forms a plural in the same manner as other nouns.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 9.54 (16th ed. 2010). However, a reference to dollars should use a singular verb.
Do Not Say: | Say |
There are appropriated $5,000 to . . . | There is appropriated $5,000 to . . . |
A simple fraction, such as one-half, is generally spelled out.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.14 (16th ed 2010). An alternative to a fraction is a decimal. If a quantity consists of a whole number and a simple fraction, it can either be spelled out or expressed in numerals. However, it is generally preferred to express the quantity in numerals.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 9.15 (16th ed 2010).
one-half . . .
two-thirds voting . . .
4-3/4
The following rules relate to hyphenation of numbers.m See, e.g. , United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual , Rules 6.36-6.39 (2000).
A hyphen is used when a number is spelled out to begin a sentence. This rule includes both a cardinal or ordinal number.
Twenty-one . . .
Twenty-first . . .
A fraction is hyphenated when it is used as a single quantity.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 9.14 (16th ed 2010). However, if the numerator or denominator is a compound number requiring a hyphen, it is the only number hyphenated.
two-thirds . . .
six sixty-fourths . . .
A hyphen is used when a mixed number is expressed in either Arabic numerals or spelled out to begin a sentence.
1-1/2
One and one-half
Spell out numbers nine and under when enumerating a common noun.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 9.3 (16th ed. 2010). Express numbers 10 and above in Arabic numerals.
four persons
10 cats
Notwithstanding the general nine and under rule, a legislative drafter should always use Arabic numbers to express the following.
Express money using Arabic numerals.c See, e.g., Alaska Legislative Affairs Agency, Manual of Legislative Drafting , p. 63 (2003); Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Bill Drafting Manual 2002, Chapter 12. A drafter should use the symbol "$" to express dollars, but spell out the word "cents" to express cents.
Do not say: | Say: |
fifty cents | 50 cents |
five million dollars | $5,000,000 |
Use decimals to express cents or tax-related figures such as a tax rate, assessment, or valuation. In these cases a decimal is preferred to a fraction, although at times a fraction may be the only way to express a tax rate.
$5.83
50 cents
.0032 per assessed dollar valuation
sales tax rate of 5.85%
sales tax rate of 5-9/32%
Do not use zeros after a decimal unless actual cents must be expressed.
Do not say: | Say: |
$5.00 | $5 |
In listing monetary amounts in tabular form, however, use both decimals and zeros.
$ 5.25
|
194.10
|
2,100.00
|
Always express population using Arabic numerals.
1,382,600 people
A city with a population of 100,000 or more.
Express a percentage using Arabic numerals, and use the percentage symbol instead of spelling out the word "percent." See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.18 (16th ed 2010).
5%
3.3%
If a number in a group of numbers exceeds nine, express the group using Arabic numerals. If all numbers in a group of numbers are nine or under, a drafter should spell out the numbers.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.7 (16th ed. 2010); United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 12.15 (2000).
Do not say: | Say: |
nine, 45, five | 9, 45, 5 |
1, 5, and 8 | one, five, and eight |
When listing numbers in tabular form, use Arabic numerals.
10
|
100
|
3
|
A reference to statute is always drafted with numerals.
Click here for a more detailed discussion concerning references to statute.
Utah Constitution, Article XIII, Section 2
Subsections 32-6-15(1)(b) through (e)
28 U.S.C. Sec. 105(a)
Pub. L. No. 99-999
Express a grade level using arabic numerals. Use ordinals only as adjectives and spell them out.
Do not say: | Say: |
grade one | grade 1 |
grade twelve | grade 12 |
a student in the first grade | a student in grade 1 |
1st grade students | first grade students |
11th grade students | eleventh grade students |
kindergarten through grade two | kindergarten through grade 2 |
students in the 10th through 12th grades | students in the tenth through twelfth grades |
The nine and under rule is most used when referring to a measurementc See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 9.13 (16th ed 2010). or to age.
The expression of a measurement generally requires the basic application of the nine and under rule.
40 gallons
two quarts
500 feet
six inches
The expression of age can be ambiguous at times. The phrase "older than 18 years old" could mean the day after the 18th birthday or the day of the 19th birthday. "When expressing age, the drafter must remember that a person reaches an age on the person's birthday and thereafter is older than that age."c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 75 (2005).
Either the term "old" or the term "of age" may be used when referring to a person's age. However, the term chosen should be used consistently throughout a piece of legislation.
Do not say: | Say: |
If an applicant is more than 21 years old, . . . | If an applicant is 21 years old or older, . . . |
If an applicant is between 21 and 50 years old, . . . | If an applicant is at least 21 years old, but is younger than 50 years old, . . . |
The term "amount" is used to refer to something as a mass, such as the "amount of oil."c See, e.g., Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual, p. 89 (2007); Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual for the State of Arkansas (Non-Appropriation Bills Only), p. 52 (2006); Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services, Colorado Legislative Drafting Manual, 11-13 (2008). "Number" is used to refer to individual items, such as "the number of applicants exceed 500."c See, e.g., Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual , p. 89 (2007); Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual for the State of Arkansas (Non-Appropriation Bills Only), p. 52 (2006); Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services, Colorado Legislative Drafting Manual , 11-13 (2008).
�Less� applies to mass nouns or to units and ideas that are not discreet or that cannot be counted, including amount, quality, and size:c See, e.g., Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual, p. 89 (2007); Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual for the State of Arkansas (Non-Appropriation Bills Only), p. 49-50 (2006); Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services, Colorado Legislative Drafting Manual, 11-17, 11-18 (2008); Texas Legislative Council, Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual , 7.38 (2006).
"Funds" should be used to refer to assets that are set apart for a specific purpose or in a specific account. "Money" should be used to refer to cash or a sum of money. "Monies" should never be used. "Money" is a plural term for which there is no singular.
When drafting, a legislative drafter will often need to express a date or time in statute. The following highlights the combinations of Arabic numerals and words used to express a date or time.
Never use the phrase "o'clock." Use "a.m." or "p.m." with the exception that "noon" and "midnight" should be used instead of "12:00 p.m." or "12:00 a.m."c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 9.39 (16th ed. 2010); Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 276-277 (2nd ed. 2003). Do not use a colon to express minutes unless actual minutes are indicated.
Do not say: | Say: |
10:00 p.m. | 10 p.m. |
10:15 a.m. | |
12 p.m. | noon |
12 a.m. | midnight |
To eliminate uncertainty in expressing a period of time, the first and last day of the period should be specified. Make clear the first day of the period. Do not use an imprecise term such as "from," "to," "by," or "until."c See, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 74 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 268-273 (2nd ed. 2003). If an act must be done by the end of a time period, a drafter should indicate whether it should be done before the period begins or whether it must be done within the period.c See, e.g., Mellinkoff, Legal Writing: Sense and Nonsense, p. 41-43 (1982).
Do not say: | Say: |
July 1, 2015, to July 1, 2016, |
Beginning July 1, 2015, and before July 1, 2016, . . . |
Between July 1, 2015, and July 1, 2016, | Beginning on or after July 1, 2015, and ending on or before June 30, 2016, . . . |
a taxable year beginning on or after July 1, 2015, but beginning before June 30, 2015, . . . |
Express a date simply using common notation. Utah Code 68-3-12.5(14) states that "month" means a calendar month. For a legislative drafter's purposes, "week" also means a calendar week.
If a date is expressed in a whole day, use "day" not "time." "Time" may be construed as referring to the exact time of day or night.
Do not say: | Say: |
Five days after the time when . . . | Five days after the day on which . . . |
A drafter may use a set day of the week to indicate a deadline or other time restraint.
A licensee shall renew a license each year on the first Monday of April.
When referring to an effective date, use the date itself rather than ambiguous phrases such as "after this chapter takes effect."
After July 1, 2015, members shall serve two-year terms.
When referring to providing notice, the time should be followed by an apostrophe (denoting the possessive case)
. . . shall provide 48 hours' notice . . ." or "shall provide seven days' notice . . ."
When referring to a date, do not use ordinal numbers or subscripts.
Do not say: | Say: | |
January 1st of each year | January 1 of each year |
If a sentence continues after a date that includes a year, always add a comma after the year.
Do not say: | Say: | |
On or before January 1, 2015 the commission shall . . . | On or before January 1, 2015, the commission shall . . . |
If a time period is expressed in whole years and the context creates no special ambiguity, use the word "year." If a continuous two-year period is intended, use "for a two-year period" rather than "for two years."
If legislation references a time period spanning years (e.g., fiscal years), include only the last two digits of the last year.
fiscal year 2015-16
Avoid using an abbreviation, except to cite a law like federal statutes (et seq.) or to indicate a time of day (a.m., p.m.). Although a word such as "etc.," and "e.g." is always abbreviated, it should not be used in legislative drafting.
A legislative drafter should avoid using an acronym in drafting.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 185 (2006).
A condition is generally a prerequisite for applying a provision.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 71 (2005). If a condition is needed, the condition should be stated in simple terms. If only one or two simple conditions apply, the conditions can be stated first and the general rule can then follow.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 71 (2005). The word "if" should be used to introduce the condition.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 71 (2005).
If a person violates this chapter, that person is subject to prosecution.
A legislative drafter should avoid:
A legislative drafter should state a general rule or category directly rather than describe the rule or category by stating its exception.
Do not say: | Say: |
All persons except those 18 years or older shall | A person younger than 18 years old shall |
However, at times it is necessary to state the circumstances under which a requirement or rule of a statute is not applicable.c See, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 71 (2005). When an exception is used, it should be stated in simple terms. If only one exception applies, the general rule should be stated first and the exception should follow. The term "except" should be used to introduce an exception.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 71 (2005).
Do not say: | Say: |
This chapter applies to all persons except persons 65 years of age or older. | This chapter applies to a person who is younger than 65 years of age. |
If there are multiple exceptions, a legislative drafter should consider:
(1) (a) Except as provided in Subsection (1)(b), the director shall . . .
(5) The director shall . . . , except if the applicant:
(a) is a minor;
(b) has been convicted of a felony; or
(c) . . .
"Expressing a formula in the statutes is one of the more difficult drafting problems, because it requires translating one system of communication (mathematics) into another (prose)."c Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 97 (1996). An option available to a drafter is to break each step of the formula into a separate subsection in an enumeration or interlocked unit.c Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 97 (1996). A drafter must be careful to ensure that the order of each step of the formula follows the proper sequence, because if the formula mixes multiplication or division with addition or subtraction, the order matters.
The commission shall calculate the fee owed under this section by:
(1) multiplying the annual income of the applicant by .5; and
(2) subtracting $50 from the amount calculated under Subsection (1).
A limitation should be avoided if possible. Generally, a rearrangement of sentences or wording will accomplish the objective without use of a limitation. If a limitation must be used, it should generally:
"Applicant" means a person applying for a license, but does not include a public entity.
(1) (a) Subject to Subsection (1)(b), "applicant" means a person applying for a license.
(b) "Applicant" does not include a public entity.
To provide access and readability, a legislative drafter should enumerate or list multiple exceptions or conditions in separate paragraphs.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 64-68, 71-72 (2005); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 53-63 (1996). Also, "[o]ne of the best techniques for the drafter to eliminate unnecessary words and to enhance clarity is to tabulate multiples of the actor, action, object, complement, or qualifiers of any of them."c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 64 (2005). This construct is called by a variety of terms such as lists, tabulations, enumerations, or interlocked units. Signs that creating an interlocked unit can be helpful include:
This title does not apply to:
(1) an investment company;
(2) a securities broker dealer;
(3) an insurance company; or
(4) a licensed attorney.
If an enumeration is a sentence, the introductory clause should either be:
A legislative drafter must use care in the placement of a modifier in an interlocked unit, such as a time limitation or other qualifier.c See Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 66 (2005).
Click here for a discussion of issues raised by placement of modifiers.
When drafting a list, a legislative drafter should be aware of possible inferences that may be drawn from the fact that a particular item is not included in the list. A person may infer that a list is intended to be exclusive (i.e. the statutory language only applies to the items listed). Conversely, a person may infer that a list is general in nature and is only intended to give examples of the types of items that the statutory language applies to. These principles are recognized in the rules of statutory construction discussed here. A rule of statutory construction can be overcome by a clear indication of contrary legislative intent or policy. For example, in Utah, a legislative drafter can create a non-exclusive list by the use of the word "includes."m See, e.g., Darmstadter, Hereof, Thereof, and Everywhereof: A contrarian Guide to Legal Drafting , p. 4 (2nd ed 2008). According to Sutherland Statutory Construction, when "include" is used, "it is generally improper to conclude that [things] not specifically enumerated are excluded." Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction 47.23 (6th ed. 2000). This term is inclusive but not exclusive, allowing a court or agency to adopt additional meanings.c See Checkrite Recovery Services v. King , 52 P.3d 1265 (Utah 2002). Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(a) provides that the use of the phrase "but not limited to" after "include," "includes," or "including" is strongly discouraged.
The same section states that:
If necessary, a legislative drafter may list an item that is not to be included under a definition or enumeration. In such case, a legislative drafter may begin the list of exclusions with the phrase, "does not include . . . ."
(b) "Title loan" includes a title loan extended at the same premise on which any of the following are sold:
(i) a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 41-6a-102;
(ii) a mobile home, as defined in Section 41-6a-102; or
(iii) a motorboat, as defined in Section 73-18-2.
(c) "Title loan" does not include:
(i) a purchase money loan;
(ii) a loan made in connection with the sale of a:
(A) motor vehicle, as defined in Section 41-6a-102;
(B) mobile home, as defined in Section 41-6a-102; or
(C) motorboat, as defined in Section 73-18-2; or
(iii) a loan extended by an institution listed in Section 7-24-305.
One of the more difficult issues when drafting an interlocked unit is the use of a conjunction.m See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 66-67 (2005). The Chicago Manual of Style 5.198 (16th ed. 2010) describes "or" as a disjunctive conjunction. In general, an "and" or an "or" should proceed the last item in the interlocked unit. "And" is used to create a cumulative effect. "Or" is used to indicate alternatives. In determining the proper use of a conjunction several issues arise.
Neither cumulative or alternative: |
"Problems are created when the listing is neither cumulative in the sense that all must be included, nor in the alternative in the sense that only one of the list may be required or chosen."c See, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 66-67 (2005). In these circumstances, two tools are helpful:
|
Each level needs a conjunction: |
Often an interlocked unit will have more than one level, e.g., (1) level 1, (a) level 2, (i) level 3. A legislative drafter should be careful to include a conjunction, but only one, on each level. Problems a legislative drafter should avoid include:
|
Click here for an example.
Click here for additional discussion relating to conjunctions.
If each item in an interlocked unit is an incomplete sentence, a legislative drafter may not insert a complete sentence in the middle or at the end of the interlocked unit.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 404 (2006 ed.). If each item in the interlocked unit is a complete sentence, an item can have more than one sentence. The placement of a complete sentence or modifier is critical because it may be unclear whether the modifier modifies or applies to each item in the interlocked unit or only the last item.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 404 (2006 ed.).
It is important that an interlocked unit be consistent in structure. For example, the first word of each enumeration in the interlocked unit should be of the same class and appropriate to the introduction to the enumerated series.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 67 (2005). Moreover, "[i]f the language of the introductory text and [interlocked unit] comprise a single sentence, the introductory text and each individual paragraph, or other subdivision, must constitute a coherent, grammatically correct sentence."c National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules , Rule 404 (2006 ed.).
In referring to a public officer or agency, a legislative drafter should use the official and correct title of the person or agency. For example, a drafter should not call the executive director of the Department of Commerce, "director," or the commissioner of the Department of Financial Institutions, "executive director." For a listing of official titles of public entities in Utah, see State Organization Charts (prepared by the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, found at www.le.state.ut.us/lrgc/stateorganizationcharts.pdf ).
A legislative drafter should divide a long sentence or phrase into a shorter and more readable paragraph when amending existing code as well as when writing new material. A legislative drafter should avoid adding a paragraph without enumeration at the end of a section.
(1)(a) A person shall place a payment on a contract that is retained or withheld in an interest-bearing account.
(b) The interest earned on the account described in Subsection (1)(a) shall:
(i) accrue for the benefit of the contractor and subcontractor; and
(ii) be paid after the project is completed and accepted by: (A) the board of commissioners; . . . .
A legislative drafter should be careful in the use of possessive nouns.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.).
A legislative drafter should limit the use of pronouns in legislation because of the risk of ambiguity as to what noun a pronoun applies.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 197 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 39-41 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 364 (2nd ed. 2003). In addition to the risks associated with clearly referencing the appropriate noun, use of a pronoun creates issues related to gender-specific language.
Click here for further discussion of drafting in gender-neutral language.
A proviso is archaic and usually results in an unintelligible phrase.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell, p. 279-280 (2nd ed. 2003). See also Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Statutory Construction, 21:11 (6th ed., 2007-08 Supp., 2002 revision). An expression like "provided, that," "provided further that," should not be used.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 72 (2005). In most cases, rearranging a sentence eliminates the need for a proviso. If a clause modified by a proviso is a complete thought, it should always be rewritten as a complete sentence.
Click here for information regarding rewriting a proviso as an exception.
Click here for information regarding rewriting a proviso as a condition.
A legislative drafter should avoid the use of relational words such as "now," currently," or "presently," because it is unclear as to what specific point of time is being referenced.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 277-278 (2nd ed. 2003).
When alphabetizing is required or helpful, a legislative drafter should use the letter-by-letter system of alphabetizing.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 16.59 (16th ed. 2010). In the letter-by-letter approach, alphabetization continues across a space or punctuation. The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed. 2010) provides more detail on alphabetizing.
Many terms and phrases are difficult in meaning, spelling, or usage. Terms which commonly raise drafting problems are described in this section or in the list of problem words or phrases contained here.
To avoid ambiguity in writing, a legislative drafter should use the singular subject. A legislative drafter should most commonly use the singular articles "a," "an," and "the" in listing a singular subject.m See, e.g., Darmstadter, Hereof, Thereof, and Everywhereof: A contrarian Guide to Legal Drafting , p. 3 (2nd ed 2008); National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 196 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 38-39 (2005); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 80-83 (1996); For a discussion of when to use "a" or "the," see Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.) and Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 80-83 (1996). If the intent is to apply to a single subject, a drafter should consider the use of the adjective "one" instead of an article.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 38 (2005).
Sometimes the use of these articles creates an ambiguity, and on these rare occasions, a legislative drafter can use the indefinite pronoun "any" or "each." "Each" is used if imposing an obligation to act, and "any" is used if granting a right, privilege, or power. The term "every" should not be used.
Do not say: | Say: |
The commissioner shall issue a certificate to an insurance company. |
The commissioner shall issue a certificate to each insurance company. |
The commissioner may issue a certificate to an insurance company. | The commissioner may issue a certificate to any insurance company. |
If the subject is plural, an article or indefinite pronoun is not needed. However, the singular expression is preferred. The terms "all" and "some" should not be used.
The noun "act" should not be used except in the title of a title, chapter, part, or section. "Act," when referring to legislation, generally refers to the law once it is passed by a legislative body. Some rules of statutory construction state that the phrase "this act" in an amended section is generally held to refer to the whole bill as amended, and not merely to the amended portion.c Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction 22:35 (6th ed.2002 revision).
Confusion as to what "act" is at issue can arise when a statute is amended several times in different legislative sessions. A legislative drafter should use the word "bill" when referring to a bill before passage by the Legislature, but should avoid codifying the term "bill."
Do not say: | Say: |
As used in this act: . . . | As used in this chapter: . . . |
Click here for further discussion of the term "bill."
"Affect" (almost always used as a verb) means to have an influence on something. (e.g., Diet and exercise affect your health.) Other uses of "affect" are not used in legislative drafting (e.g., She affected indifference, though deeply hurt; She displayed a happy affect. )
"Effect," when used as a noun (which is most common in drafting), means an outcome or result. (e.g., Diet and exercise had an effect on her health.) When used as a verb (which rarely occurs in drafting),"effect" means to make something happen. (e.g., The principal hoped to effect change in the school through a new reading program. )
If a drafter is unsure whether the word "affect" of "effect" is being used appropriately in a sentence, the drafter should ask whether the word is being used as a verb or a noun. If the word is being used as a verb in legislative drafting, "affect" is almost always the correct word. If the word is being used as a noun in legislative drafting, "effect" is almost always the correct word.
Do not say: | Say: |
This bill takes affect on July 1, 2015. | This bill takes effect on July 1, 2015. |
Never use "and/or."c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell, p. 265-268 (2nd ed. 2003); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction, 21:14 (6th ed., 2007-08 Supp., 2002 revision). A legislative drafter should determine which term is correct.c See, e.g., Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 83-87 (1996). However, even an experienced drafter has difficulty in making the distinction in all cases.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 259-265 (2nd ed. 2003); Dickerson, Materials on Legal Drafting , p. 235-253 (1981). In determining whether "and" or "or" is appropriate, a legislative drafter must determine if a sentence is mandatory or permissive.c See, e.g., Dickerson, Materials on Legal Drafting, p. 238 (1981). If all the items in an enumeration are to be taken together, they may be joined at the last two items by the conjunction "and." If the items are to be taken in the alternative, "or" is used. If terms are to be taken both together and in the alternative, the "and/or" should not be used, but a legislative drafter should consider:
Click here for further discussion of the use of "and" or "or" in an interlocked unit or list.
"Ensure" is the general term that means to make sure that something will or will not happen.c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual, p. 90 (2007); Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual for the State of Arkansas (Non-Appropriation Bills Only), p. 52 (2006); Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Bill Drafting Manual 2002 , Chapter 12. "Insure" applies only to mean underwriting financial risk. "Assure" is used to indicate that others are made to feel better.
When drafting in the Utah Code, a legislative drafter should use the term "attorney fees" instead of "attorneys' fees," "attorney's fees," or "attorneys fees."m This pattern is consistent with how Utah courts and court rules cite to attorney fees. See, e.g., Utah Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 73. Attorney fees; Gardner v. Board of County Comm'nrs , 178 P.3d 893 (Utah 2008).
Biennially means every two years.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Texas Legislative Council, Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual, 7.38 (2006). Biannually and semiannually mean twice a year.c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.220 (16th ed. 2010). Bimonthly has been defined to mean both every two months and twice a month.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 276 (2nd ed. 2003). To avoid confusion, instead of these words, a legislative drafter should consider using a phrase like "every two" or "twice a."
The term "bill" should be used to refer to a bill in its entirety. However, a drafter should avoid codifying the term "bill." At the time a bill is drafted it may be clear that in a bill the term "bill" refers to the whole bill even though the bill may affect several different titles of the Utah Code. However, the term "bill" is unclear after a bill is enacted and the affected sections are included in the Utah Code in their numerical place, because the sections may be scattered throughout the Utah Code.
If it is necessary to use the term "bill" in codified language, a legislative drafter should consider including revisor instructions directing the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel to change the term "bill" to the appropriate cite in Utah Laws.
Do not say: | Say: |
This bill is repealed on . . . . |
Chapter [or title, part, or section] 5, Consumer Assistance Act, is repealed . . . . Unless you mean:
(repeal entire bill/generally uncodified)This bill is repealed on July 1, 2015 |
Click here for further discussion of revisor instructions.
The word "compose" means - to make up, or to form the substance of, and "comprise" means - to be made up of or include.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Texas Legislative Council, Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual , 7.38 (2006). Both involve the idea of containing, embracing, comprehending, or surrounding. "Compose" also means making or forming. "Comprise" suggests including or containing. The whole comprises the parts, the parts do not comprise the whole. "Comprised of" is a wordy expression and should not be used.c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual for the State of Arkansas (Non-Appropriation Bills Only) , p. 53 (2006).
The board is composed of 10 members.
The board comprises 10 members
Although "consecutive" or "successive" means following after, "consecutive" implies following immediately after without interruption, while "successive" requires only that it follow after and allows for there to be intervals or gaps between the events.c See, e.g., Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual, p. 89 (2007).
"Continual" means an action occurs repeatedly over a period of time. "Continuous" means an action that is an uninterrupted flow.c See, e.g., Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual , p. 90 (2007); Office of Legislative Legal Services, Colorado Legislative Drafting Manual , p. 11-16 (2008); Texas Legislative Council, Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual, 7.38 (2006).
A legislative drafter should avoid the word "deem." The term "consider" is generally the appropriate term.c See, e.g., Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.). The term "deem" may be appropriate in the rare case that it is used to state that something is to be treated as true even if contrary to fact.c See, e.g., Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); See also Alabama Legislative Reference Service, Drafting Style Manual, Rule 7 (DATE).
A drafter should avoid using as an adjective a term such as "duly," "properly," or "true," e.g. , "duly licensed." Unless intended, the use of these terms could be interpreted as imposing an additional requirement beyond that imposed by use of the noun. For example, is "duly licensed" intended to mean more than "licensed." If the noun is sufficient, the use of these adjectives should be avoided.
The term "ex officio" when used in the context of membership on a committee, commission, or other body means that the individual is a member of that body because the individual holds a specific office or position. For example, if a statute states that the executive director of the Department of Commerce is a member of a committee, the executive director is an ex officio member. "Ex officio" does not mean that a member is a nonvoting member.c See, e.g., The Official Roberts Rules of Order Website, Frequently Asked Questions, Question 2, www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#2 (last visited 9/4/14). A drafter should avoid the use of this term.
"Farther" is used for physical distance and "further" is used for a figurative distance and applies to time, quantity, or degree.c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual, p. 90 (2007); Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services, Colorado Legislative Drafting Manual , 11-17 (2008).
A legislative drafter should use "if" not "when" to express a condition.c See, e.g., Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 202 (2006 ed.). Similarly, a legislative drafter should use "if" rather than a phrase such as "In the event of."c See, e.g., Darmstadter, Hereof, Thereof, and Everywhereof: A contrarian Guide to Legal Drafting , p. 3 (2nd ed 2008); The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.220 (16th ed. 2010). A drafter uses the term "when" to refer to time or to refer to a specific act that is certain to occur such as "when this section takes effect."c See, e.g., Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 202 (2006 ed.).
Do not say: | Say: |
If the complaint is filed, the director shall schedule a hearing . . . |
When the complaint is filed, the director shall schedule a hearing . . . |
When an applicant is qualified . . . | If the director finds that an applicant is qualified . . . |
Click here for information on the use of the word "includes."
Avoid the use of the term "notwithstanding" unless referring to a specific provision of the Utah Code.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 255-256 (2006). See also Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 202 (2006 ed.). The term "notwithstanding" is often used as a shortcut to avoid conflicts with other laws. It is preferable for a drafter to rewrite the section so that there is no conflict. If a conflict cannot be avoided, a drafter should specify the existing section that is in conflict and indicate that the provisions of the bill supersede that section. It is important to be as specific as necessary to explain which provision is being superseded. Only if it is impossible to specify a section that is in conflict should a legislative drafter state that the section supersedes conflicting sections.
Do not say: | Say: |
Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary . . . | This section supersedes Section 41-6-17. |
The placement of the word "only" in a sentence may create ambiguity.c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 188 (2006); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 297-298 (2nd ed. 2003).
Only the governor may appoint a person nominated by the commission.
The governor only may appoint a person nominated by the commission.
The governor may only appoint a person nominated by the commission.
The governor may appoint a person only nominated by the commission.
The governor may appoint a person nominated only by the commission.
A legislative drafter should place the word "only" as close as possible to the word that it modifies.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 63-64 (2005).
"Use 'a person' to designate the actor in the provision unless there is some reason to limit the application of a provision . . . to a designated class. This term is the most general because it covers both natural and artificial persons and all types of entities no matter what their formal legal status."c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 37 (2005). See also Utah Code 68-3-12 (defining "person"). The term "party" refers to a party in a legal action, and should not be used to denote a "person" who carries out an act or discharges a duty.c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 37 (2005). The term "individual" should be used to refer to a natural person, to the exclusion of artificial persons or entities. The term "entity," by itself, is vague.
Do not say: | Say: |
A party that violates . . . | A person that violates . . . |
The word "before" is preferable to the phrase "prior to" or "previous to."c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Alabama Legislative Reference Service, Drafting Style Manual, Rule 7.
An appropriate, simpler word like "issue," "publish," or "make" is preferable to "promulgate."c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 354 (2nd ed. 2003). An example of a circumstance when "promulgate" should not be used is when authorizing an agency to make an administrative rule.
Do not say: | Say: |
In accordance with Title 63G, Chapter 4, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, the division may promulgate rules to . . . | In accordance with Title 63G, Chapter 4, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, the division may make rules to . . . |
Click here for further discussion on making administrative rules.
Use of the phrase "the provisions of" before a citation to a subsection, section, part, chapter, or title is superfluous and should not be used.c See, e.g., Uniform Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.).
Do not say: | Say: |
comply with the provisions of Section 34-1-101 | comply with Section 34-1-101 |
An exception to this general rule is when a legislative drafter is distinguishing between different provisions of the same section, part, chapter, or title.
Notwithstanding the other provisions in this chapter, . . .
A phrase like "pursuant to" is used to identify or refer to another provision of law. The following phrases are acceptable, but a legislative drafter should be consistent in their use:
"Respectively" and "as the case may be" are often used improperly. Because of the potential for confusion, the phrases should rarely be used.
If a drafter desires to apply A to X, B to Y, and C to Z, that may be clarified by stating, "A, B, and C apply to X, Y, and Z, respectively." Here the three relationships are concurrent, not alternative. In such a statement, the verb should be plural. On the other hand, if a drafter desires to apply A if X occurs, B if Y occurs, and C if Z occurs, the correct statement would be "If X, Y, or Z occurs, A, B, or C applies, as the case may be." Here the three relationships are alternative, not concurrent. The verb should be singular in this situation.
The phrase "rules and regulations" is an inaccurate statement in drafting Utah law. A "rule" is made by an administrative agency in this state and is referred to as such in official publications. A state agency does not make a "regulation."c See, e.g., Utah Code, Title 63G, Chapter 3 , Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act. A legislative drafter, when referring to a rule made by a Utah agency, should only use the term "rule." The term "regulation" is generally used at the federal level and may be used to refer to a federal regulation.
Click here for further information on administrative rulemaking.
A legislative drafter should use "a," "an," "it," "that," "the," "them," "these," "this," or "those" instead of "said," "such", or "same."c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules , Rule 208 (2006 ed.); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 38-39 (2005). "Such" is not preferred but its use is sometimes necessary to modify a preceding term or phrase. "Such as" and "such a" may be used to introduce an example.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 208 (2006 ed.)
Do not use expressions such as "is authorized to," "is empowered to," "has the duty to," "can," or "the Legislature intends that the director shall." "Shall" or "may" are more appropriate expressions.m See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 190-193 (2006) (while acknowledging some ambiguity in how "shall" and "may" are interpreted, states that "[d]rafters should follow the convention: Use 'shall' to command and 'may' to allow."); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction , 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction 21:8 (6th ed. 2002 revision).
Because some courts on occasion have interpreted "shall" to mean "may" and vice versa, it is imperative that a legislative drafter give careful consideration to the context.c See Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 192-193 (2006). If a problem of interpretation arises, a legislative drafter can add a sentence stating that an action inconsistent with the provision is void.
In order to avoid misinterpretation of legislative intent, the meaning of these terms, and the circumstances under which they should be used in drafting, are addressed in Utah Code 68-3-12.
"'May' means that an action is authorized or permissive."c Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(g). "May" is used when granting a right, privilege, or power, or indicating discretion to act.c 660 See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 203 (2006 ed.); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 49-50 (2005); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 78-79 (1996). Avoid a phrase such as "is authorized to" or "in [the actor's] discretion."c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 49-50 (2005).
Do not say: | Say: |
This director is authorized to issue . . . | The director may issue . . . |
The use of the word "should" is strongly discouraged, except as provided in Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(c)(ii). The word "should" should never be used to create authority or permit an act.
"Shall" means that an action is required or mandatory.c Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(j). "Shall" is used when indicating an obligation to act.c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell, p. 268-273 (2nd ed. 2003); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 48-40 (2005); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 79 (1996). See also National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 203 (2006 ed.).
Do not say: | Say: |
The director will submit a budget. | The director shall submit a budget. |
Click here for a discussion of the misuse of the term "shall" in creating a false imperative.
The use of the word "must" is strongly discouraged when the term "shall" can be used in its place.c Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(d). "Must" may be used in the following circumstances:
The use of the word "should" is strongly discouraged, except as provided in Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(c)(ii).
On occasion, "must" may be used if an action is intended to be a condition precedent to the accrual of a right or privilege being authorized or prohibited. However, "must" should not be used as a replacement for "shall."m Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(d). See also, e.g., Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 80 (1996). This manual departs from the Drafting Rules of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws to a degree as to use of the term "must" or "must not." See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 203, 204 (2006 ed.).
Whenever possible, an obligation or discretion to act should be stated positively. However, if a right, privilege, or power is abridged and the sentence contains a negative subject, "may not" should be used.c Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(h) and (2)(a)(i). See also, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 203 (2006 ed.); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 41-42 (2005); Alabama Legislative Reference Service, Drafting Style Manual, Rule 8; Alaska Legislative Affairs Agency, Manual of Legislative Drafting , p. 62 (2003); Maine Legislative Drafting Manual , Part III, Ch. 2, Sec. 1; Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Bill Drafting Manual 2002, Chapter 12; North Dakota Legislative Council, 2007 Legislative Drafting Manual , p. 96; South Dakota Legislature, Drafting Manual, p. 24; Texas Legislative Council, Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual, 7.30 (2006); Code Revisor, Washington Bill Drifting Guide 2007 , Part IV, (1)(g) (except that permits limited use of "shall not"); West Virginia Legislature Bill Drafting Manual , p. 24 (2006). This is preferable to "shall not." A statute that includes the phrase "shall not" negates the obligation to act, but not the permission or authority to act. "A person may not" negates the obligation, and the permission or authority, to act and is, therefore, the stronger prohibition.c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules , Rule 203 (2006 ed.); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 41-42 (2005). Additionally, "should not" should never be used to prohibit an act.c Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(a)(ii). "Should not" gives the actor the discretion to disregard an attempted prohibition.
A phrase such as "no person may" or "no person shall" should not be used in drafting legislation.c See, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 41-42, 50 (2005). For example, "no person shall" literally means that no one is required to act. The negative is best used with the action and not the actor.
Do not say: | Say: |
No licensee may engage in . . . | A licensee may not engage in . . . |
A legislative drafter should not use the term "should" or "ought" instead of the term "shall," "must," or "may."c Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(c)(i).See also, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules , Rule 205 (2006 ed.). The term "should" may be used in the following circumstances:c Utah Code 68-3-12(2)(c)(ii).
A vender shall notify the department within a reasonable time after the vender discovers or should have discovered that the item is stolen.
Except in the enacting clause of a bill or resolution, reference to "the state of Utah" is unnecessary. Utah cannot legislate for another state. When it is necessary to refer to the state of Utah, use "state," "this state," or "Utah."
The terms "that" and "which" are not interchangeable. The choice between these terms is determined by the type of clause that follows the terms.c See, e.g., Wydick, True Confessions of a Diddle-Diddle Dumb-Head, 11 Scribes J. Legal Writing 57 (2007); National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.220 (16th ed. 2010); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 299-301 (2nd ed. 2003). "That" is used to introduce a restrictive clause, or a clause that provides information necessary for full comprehension of the sentence. A restrictive clause is not set off by commas.
Any funds that are not restricted lapse.
"Which" is used to introduce a nonrestrictive clause, or a clause that provides nonessential or parenthetical information. A nonrestrictive clause is set off by commas. Often, in legislative drafting, the nonrestrictive clause is not useful and should not be included.
The division, which is responsible for licenses, shall make rules, in accordance with Title 63G, Chapter 3, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, establishing a filing procedure.
Click here for further discussion of the use of a comma in a sentence.
"Through" means "to and including" and should be used instead of "to" to reference a series of three or more statutory provisions.c See, e.g., Arizona Legislative Council, The Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual, p. 93 (2007). The "to" may also be problematic in drafting a range of dates. A drafter generally should use the terms "after" and "before" instead of "to," "until," "by," or "between."c See, e.g., Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, 268-271 (2nd ed. 2003); Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Bill Drafting Manual 2002 , 10.10.
Do not say: | Say: |
From July 1, 2012 to . . . | After June 30, 2012, and before . . . |
Between July 1, 2013, and . . . | After June 30, 2013, and before . . . |
[To, until, or by] June 30, 2012 . . . | Before June 30, 2012 . . . |
"Verbal" means to use words. If a drafter wants to indicate that something is to be communicated by word of mouth, a legislative drafter should use the word "oral."c See, e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.220 (16th ed. 2010).
"When" is preferred to "where" except when dealing with a specific place. However, "if" is the preferred term to "when" to express a condition.m See also DM, Ch. 12(4)(c)(xvi), If, When
Do not say: | Say: |
Where the licensee applies . . . | When the licensee applies . . . |
There are multiple spellings of the word "willful." A drafter in the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel should use the spelling "willful" and "willfully."c See United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 5.2 (2000)
Utah has adopted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act which anticipates that commerce and government services could be conducted electronically.c See Utah Code Title 46, Chapter 4 , Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. In light of this, a drafter should be careful to draft in a media neutral way to allow for electronic transactions. However, the Utah Code has defined the term "writing" to include electronic writings.c See, e.g., Utah Code 46-4-502.
The Utah Code is divided into titles, chapters, parts, sections, and subsections.
A title, chapter, or part is:
If the reference is in Title 59: | If the reference is not in Title 59: |
Chapter 3, Part 1 | Title 59, Chapter 3, Part 1 |
If a citation is to an entire title, chapter, or part that has a title, a legislative drafter should include the title (i.e. the name of the title) in the citation.
Title 70A, Utah Uniform Commercial Code
Title 61, Chapter 1, Utah Uniform Securities Act
Title 59, Chapter 12, Part 1, Tax Collection
Chapter 3, Part 1, Enforcement
When citing to two or more chapters, if a drafter uses the conjunction "and" or "through," the words "chapter" or "part" should be plural. If a legislative drafter uses the conjunction "or," the words "chapter" or part" should be singular.
Title 7, Chapters 1, 2, and 19
Chapters 1 and 3
Chapters 1 through 3
Chapters 16, 17, and 18, and Chapter 20, Parts 1, 3, and 6
Chapters 5 through 14, and Chapter 17
Part 1 or 2
A section is the fundamental unit of the Utah Code. A section is numbered in three distinct numeric phrases (a title or chapter may also include a letter following the number) offset by hyphens. When recodifying or creating a title or chapter, a section in the chapter should have as the last number in the section number a three-digit number. This system provides greater ease in adding new sections.m Click here for further discussion on numbering a section.
Section 59-3-101
Section 62A-4a-101
Legislation should be drafted using the subsection numbering method shown in the example below. A legislative drafter should make every effort to not use a subsection level beyond the level of a capital letter, e.g., (A). A legislative drafter may not use a subsection level beyond those designated in the example below without discussing the issue with legislative general counsel. If a series of subsections at the same level exceeds 26 and the subsections are designated by letters, the extension is made by doubling or tripling the letters as needed.
Click here for an example.
Currently, a drafter is permitted and encouraged to renumber within an existing definitional section to alphabetize the section. In other circumstances, a drafter should not unnecessarily reorder subsections within a section because this type of reordering makes it difficult to compare sections by computer to look for potential conflicts. Also, it is possible that by rearranging the subections, the change inadvertently alters the substance of the section and the change in meaning may be difficult to catch.
If a legislative drafter is amending a section of the Utah Code in which the subsections are numbered in a manner that does not comply with the basic rules and the drafter intends to make the numbering compliant, the drafter should check cross references to determine if that particular subsection is referenced in another section of the Utah Code. A legislative drafter must then change all other references to conform with the new numbering.
A legislative drafter may also want to check relevant case law to determine whether that specific subsection is mentioned in a court opinion. If that is the case, a legislative drafter may want to consider leaving the whole section and the impacted subsection as it is currently numbered to preserve the legal history of the subsection even though it is inconsistent with this general drafting guideline.
A reference to another provision of law is by inference to another section of the Utah Code unless otherwise stated. Therefore, a reference to the "Utah Code" or a phrase like "of this code" is superfluous.
Do not say: | Say: |
Section 58-1-1, Utah Code | Section 58-1-1 |
Section 58-1-1 of this code | Section 58-1-1 |
Never refer to other portions of the Utah Code with "above," "below," "hereinafter," "hereinbefore," or similarly vague terms.c See, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 73 (2005). Always cite the specific designation. References to single or multiple sections throughout the Utah Code should be as shown in the following example:
Single section: | Section 58-1-1 |
One of many sections: | Section 19-7-101, 19-7-102, or 19 -7-103 |
All of many sections: | Sections 32A-12-1, 32A-12-4, and 32A-12-10 |
Consecutive sections: | Sections 59-10-101 through 59-10-110 |
Do not use the phrase "Section 59-10-101 to Section 59-10-110" because it is ambiguous. Use the phrase "Sections 59-10-101 through 59-10-110" instead. Do not use the phrase "the provisions of" before a citation to a section or subsection because the language is superfluous.
Do not say: | Say: |
A person subject to Section 58-1-1 to Section 58-1-10 shall comply with provisions of Section 63G-2-201. | A person subject to Sections 58-1-1 through 58-1-10 shall comply with Section 63G-2-201. |
When practical, a brief description of a cited statute may be included in the reference so the reader will not be forced to turn to the provision to see what it addresses.
The division shall use the same procedure described in Section 13-1-1, concerning consumer grievances.
A subdivision within either a section or subsection is called a "subsection." Although, when citing from another section, a legislative drafter should generally cite only to a section, a drafter may cite to a subsection when it is needed to avoid confusion. A subsection is cited within parentheses. A legislative drafter should try to avoid citing a provision in a unit smaller than the second level of subsections, i.e., (1)(a) or (14)(b). If further division is necessary, cite to the level necessary. A reference to a subdivision is always to "Subsection," to avoid confusion and to maintain simplicity.
Subsection 58-1-1(2)
Subsection 58-1-1(3)(a)
When a subsection is referred to within the section where it is created, only the subsection reference is necessary. The phrase "of this section" should not be used.
Do not say: | Say: |
Subsection (2) of this section | Subsection (2) |
If citing to a subsection within the same section, a legislative drafter should refer to the complete subsection reference to avoid ambiguity or confusion with other subsections of that section (i.e., even within Subsection (1) refer to Subsection (1)(a) and not to Subsection (a)).
(1) (a) The director shall appoint a deputy.
(b) The deputy appointed under Subsection (1)(a) shall be a Utah resident.
(2) (a) The director may, after appointing the deputy as provided in Subsection (1)(a), employ necessary staff.
(b) Staff appointed by the director . . . .
To avoid ambiguity, if citing within a subsection to the same subsection in its entirety, a drafter should refer to the subsection by number.
(1)(c) A person that complies with the provisions described in this Subsection (1) may . . .
If a subsection is referred to in another section of the Utah Code, cite the section number with the subsection. The phrase "of Section 58-1-1" should not be used.
Do not say: | Say: |
Section 58-1-1(2) | Subsection 58-1-1(2) |
Section 58-1-1(2)(a) | Subsection 58-1-1(2)(a) |
Subsection (2) of Section 58-1-1 | Subsection 58-1-1(2) |
Subsection (2)(a) of Section 58-1-1 | Subsection 58-1-1(2)(a) |
Sometimes a bill is not codified into the Utah Code, and the only reference available is to the Laws of Utah. In that case, refer to the chapter and year of the session law involved. If a bill passes during a special session, the special session is also cited. In general, it is only necessary to refer to the most recent legislative session in which the law is enacted or amended, unless the intent is to refer to a specific action taken during a specific legislative session. A citation to the Laws of Utah should be as specific as necessary to achieve the intent of the Legislature. However, a basic format has been developed by the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel.
Laws of Utah 2007, Chapter 288, Sections 25 and 26
Laws of Utah 1991, Chapter 117, Section 1, Subsection 30-1-2(1)
Laws of Utah 2001, First Special Session, Chapter 5
Laws of Utah 2001, Chapter 334, Uncodified section 8
Within the body of legislation, the Utah Constitution is cited by article and section.
Utah Constitution, Article XIII, Section 2, Subsection (2)
A legislative rule is cited in legislation by indicating:
Legislative Joint Rule 4-1-101
Legislative Interim Rule 2.01
Senate Rule 20.01
House Rule 20.01
The Utah Rules of Evidence, Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure, Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Utah Juvenile Court Rules of Practice and Procedure may be cited in legislation and have the force of law to the extent they are not contrary to statute.m As discussed in Ch. 8 (7), Amending Supreme Court Rules of Procedure or Evidence, these rules may be amended by a two-thirds vote of both houses of the Legislature.
Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 65B
Utah Rules of Evidence, Rule 20
Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 15
Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 5
Utah Juvenile Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, Rule 10
The Utah Code of Judicial Administration should be cited as shown in the following example:m Click here for a discussion of legislation related to rules for judicial administration.
Utah Code of Judicial Administration, Rule 7-201
Whenever possible, a legislative drafter should cite federal statute by reference to the United States Code. If a cite to the United States Code is not practical, a legislative drafter may use the Public Law or Statutes at Large cite. The key principle is making it easy for an average reader of the Utah Code to find the federal law.
The term "et seq." may be used in citing federal law but not Utah Code. A phrase such as "of the laws of the United States" should not be used.
Reference to both the short title and to the United States Code citation is acceptable to enable a person to easily identify the federal law in question. However, reference to the United States Code or the Public Law should always be used.
Basic format:
21 U.S.C. Sec. 346
42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601(39)
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1396r-8
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1395i-4(c)(2)
12 U.S.C. Secs. 36(g) and 1828(d)(4)
Citing to an entire title:
United States Code, Title 23, Highways
United States Code, Title 25, Chapter 21, Indian Child Welfare Act
Citing to a chapter or other portion:
5 U.S.C. Chapter 85
Rail Programs, 49 U.S.C. Subtitle V
50 U.S.C. app. Sec. 485
Citing to original section or part before codification:
Immigration and Nationality Act, Sec. 212(d)(5), 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1182(d)(5)(A)
Education Amendments of 1972, Title IX, 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1681 et seq.
Higher Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part B, 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1071 et seq.
Solid Waste Disposal Act, Subchapter IX, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 6991c et seq.
Toxic Substances Control Act, Subchapter IV, Secs. 402 and 406, 5 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Citing to the public law or statute at large cite:
Tax Reduction Act of 1975, Pub. L. No. 94-12, 89 Stat. 26
Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104
Ute Partition Act, Pub. L. No. 83-671, 68 Stat. 868
One exception to the rule that a short title alone should not be used is when citing a well-known or often changed federal law, such as the Social Security Act or the Internal Revenue Code. When referencing the Internal Revenue Code, a legislative drafter should always refer to the cite as "section" and not "subsection."
Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3601 et seq.
Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1601 et seq.
Title XIX of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1396 et seq.
Title IV, Part D of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 651 et seq.
Part A and B of Title XVIII of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.
Subsection 454 (19)(B)(i) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 654
Section 41(c)(4), Internal Revenue Code
Section 408, Internal Revenue Code
In determining whether to indicate that a future amendment to a federal statute is incorporated because of a citation to the federal statute, a legislative drafter should consider the discussion of possible legal issues with regard to the delegation of legislative authority found by clicking here .
Mineral Lands Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. Sec. 181 et seq., as amended through May 3, 1999.
When citing a federal rule (regulation), the cite should be to the Code of Federal Regulations. Similar to a citation to federal statute, a cite to the short title or common name of a federal regulation is not required, but may be included with the cite to the Code of Federal Regulations. However, a federal regulation should not be cited only by its short title. It is unnecessary to include a phrase such as "of the Code of Federal Regulations."
9 C.F.R. Sec. 201.97
40 C.F.R. Sec. 60.51c
14 C.F.R. Part 139
40 C.F.R., Part 280, Subpart D
40 C.F.R. Part 51, Subpart S, Appendix E
21 C.F.R. Parts 101 and 131
14 C.F.R. Chapter 141
23 C.F.R. Chapter 11, Subchapter B, Part 1235.2
Schedules I through V, 21 C.F.R. Part 1308
Table One, 40 C.F.R. Sec. 261.24
Domestic Licensing of Source Material, 10 C.F.R. Part 40
Rule 144A, 17 C.F.R. Sec. 230.144A
Section 32 of Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. Sec. 226.32
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, Chapter I, Subchapter D, Trade Regulation Rules, Part 436
Within the body of legislation, a cite to the Constitution of the United States should include the relevant article and section. A cite to an amendment to the Constitution of the United States should be spelled out and initial capped.
United States Constitution, Article II, Section 3
Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
Do not say: | Say: |
The Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution | The Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution |
In the rare situations where it is necessary to cite to case law in the text of a statute, a legislative drafter should include the name and citation of the case without underlining or italics.
(b) "Uintah and Ouray Reservation" means the lands recognized as being included within the Uintah and Ouray Reservation in:
(i) Hagen v. Utah, 510 U.S. 399 (1994); and
(ii) Ute Indian Tribe v. Utah, 114 F.3d 1513 (10th Cir. 1997).