What indicates ambiguity in a statute requiring interpretation?

• A. Multiple reasonable interpretations exist.
• B. Clear, plain meaning controls.
• C. The statute has only one possible reading.
• D. Text includes explicit cross-references.

Answer: (A)

Ambiguity shows up when the language of a statute can bear more than one reasonable meaning. If two or more readings seem equally plausible, the text doesn’t settle the issue by itself, so interpretation is needed to decide which reading fits the statute’s context and purpose. In such cases, courts may look to extrinsic aids like legislative history, purpose, or canons of construction to resolve the doubt.

If the plain meaning is clear and controls, there isn’t real ambiguity—the words leave no reasonable doubt about their meaning. A statute with only one possible reading likewise isn’t ambiguous. Textual features like cross-references don’t inherently create ambiguity; they are mere references that can exist even when the meaning is clear.