What is legislative history and what are common sources used to interpret statutes; what are potential risks of relying on it?

• A. Legislative history includes executive orders and agency memoranda; risks: outdated statements.
• B. Legislative history includes expenses of legislation; risks: miscalculation of costs.
• C. Legislative history includes committee reports, sponsor statements, and floor debates; sources: committee reports, legislative hearings; risks: selective quoting, inconsistent statements.
• D. Legislative history is the text of the statute alone; risks: misinterpretation of punctuation.

Answer: (C)

Legislative history is the record of materials created during the lawmaking process that reveal what lawmakers intended when they enacted a statute. It’s useful when the text is ambiguous or silent about how a provision should apply. The most common sources to interpret statutes are committee reports, sponsor statements, and floor debates, because these show why the bill was drafted in a certain way and how its language evolved during discussion. Legislative hearings, along with amendments and bill drafts, also document the evolving discussion and changes behind the enacted law.

But there are risks to relying on legislative history. Statements can be selectively quoted to support a preferred interpretation, ignoring other records that might tell a different story. There can also be inconsistencies across different sources—what sponsors said, what committees reported, and what was debated on the floor may not all align with the final enacted text. This means legislative history should be weighed carefully and not treated as controlling the meaning of the statute.