Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf
Page Number: 22

Cite as:  562 U. S. ____ (2011) 

19 

Opinion of the Court 

When “all (or nearly all) of the” relevant judicial decisions 
have given a term or concept a consistent judicial gloss, we 
presume  Congress  intended  the  term  or  concept  to  have
that meaning when it  incorporated it into a later-enacted 
statute.  Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, 559 U. S. ___, ___ (2010)
(SCALIA,  J.,  concurring  in  part  and  concurring  in  judg-
ment)  (slip  op.,  at  5).    The  consistent  gloss  represents 
the public understanding of the term.  We cannot make the 
same  assumption  when  widespread  disagreement  exists
among the lower courts.  We must make do with giving the
term  its  most  plausible  meaning  using  the  traditional 
tools  of  statutory  interpretation.    That  is  what  we  have 
done today. 

* 

* 

* 
For  the  foregoing  reasons,  we  hold  that  the  National
Childhood  Vaccine  Injury  Act  preempts  all  design-defect 
claims  against  vaccine  manufacturers  brought  by  plain-
tiffs who seek compensation for injury or death caused by 
vaccine side effects.  The judgment of the Court of Appeals 
is affirmed. 

JUSTICE  KAGAN  took  no  part  in  the  consideration  or 

decision of this case. 

It is so ordered.