Supreme Court Decision Rests on "a"

An extraordinary Supreme Court ruling was based on one of the smallest words in the English language: a. An immigration law requires that people who might be deported receive “a notice to appear.” Does that mean only one, or could the notice be divided into two?

Justices ruled that the law requires one and only one. The ruling is significant because Agusto Niz-Chavez, an immigrant from Guatamala who has been in the United States since 2005, received two notices, each requiring different documents.

Immigrants who have 10 consecutive years in the United States have an easier time staying. But a deportation document means that the clock stops. In Niz-Chavez’s case, because he received multiple notices, his attorney claimed that his clock didn’t stop—and most justices agreed.

This case is significant also because three conservative justices ruled with the liberal justices, who formed the majority.

Other legal cases have hinged on punctuation marks, but this is the first I remember that rested on such a small article of speech. Legal writers will heed the warning to craft regulations more carefully in the future.