Section 1437d

Citation: Section 1437d
Parent Document: Rucker v. Davis, 237 F.3d 1113 (2001)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2001-01-24
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7086389/rucker-v-davis/ ↗

Full Text

722 chars

The majority’s reading of the statute requires that the drug user fall into two of the categories — a drug user must be both a household member/guest and under the tenant’s control. See Maj. Op. at 1119 — 20. But, the statute does not say this. The majority’s reading renders the enumerated categories (tenants, household members, guests) superfluous^ “We read [the statute] with the assumption that Congress intended each of its terms to have meaning. ‘Judges should hesitate ... to treat [as surplusage] statutory terms in any setting....’” Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 145, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472 (1995) (quoting Ratzlaf v. United States, 510 U.S. 135, 140-141, 114 S.Ct. 655, 126 L.Ed.2d 615 (1994)).

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Full Text