Abstract
The main focus of this Article is to explore the differences between legislatures in terms of short titles, and why there is such a transatlantic divide. Specifically, I want to address how the U.K. Parliament and the U.S. Congress, steeped in such history and both employing a common language, now produce such radically different titles for their laws. Additionally, the Scottish Parliament is included as a contemporary example of a recent formed parliament, and is used to juxtapose the findings from the other two legislatures. First, this Article takes into consideration some of the main constitutional differences between legislatures. Then, it explores some of the main structural and legislative drafting differences in regard to short titles, as well as demonstrating how short titles are used in bills and laws in each jurisdiction from a presentational perspective. Next, it examines some of the attitudes that lawmakers and those close to the lawmaking process have about short titles, by revealing interview data I accumulated while researching the topic. Finally, this Article presents the main findings from a general point of view, and then lays out findings specific to each legislature.
Recommended Citation
Jones, Brian Christopher
(2013)
"Processes, Standards, and Politics: Drafting Short Titles in the Westminster Parliament, Scottish Parliament, and U.S. Congress,"
Florida Journal of International Law: Vol. 25:
Iss.
1, Article 4.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/fjil/vol25/iss1/4