- 43 -
before construing the statute so as to override the
plain meaning of the words used therein.” [Fn. ref.
omitted.]
Majority op. pp. 10-11.
The majority fails to apply the rules of statutory
construction on which it claims to rely when, in determining the
meaning of the phrase “in-person interview” in section
7521(a)(1), it turns to the dictionary definition of the term
“interview”. Although I agree with the majority that Congress
did not “directly * * * define” the phrase “in-person interview”
in section 7521(a)(1) or any other provision in section 7521 or
in the legislative history, I disagree with the majority that
neither the statute nor the legislative history “clearly * * *
otherwise describes” that phrase. Section 7521 itself and the
legislative history of that section clearly describe what
Congress intended when it used the phrase “in-person interview”.
In determining what Congress had in mind when it used the
phrase “in-person interview” in section 7521(a)(1), the majority
improperly focuses only on section 7521(a)(1) for guidance. In
determining what Congress intended, section 7521(a)(1) may not be
read in a vacuum. It must be examined in the context of the
entire statute (i.e., section 7521) that Congress enacted in 1988
for the purpose of prescribing certain procedures that it made
applicable to all “in-person interviews”. If the majority had
undertaken such an examination, it would have become clear to the
Page: Previous 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011