Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 208.0

529US1

Unit: $U36

[09-26-01 08:36:38] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 120 (2000)

133

Opinion of the Court

context”).
It is a “fundamental canon of statutory construc-
tion that the words of a statute must be read in their context
and with a view to their place in the overall statutory
scheme.” Davis v. Michigan Dept. of Treasury, 489 U. S.
803, 809 (1989). A court must therefore interpret the stat-
ute “as a symmetrical and coherent regulatory scheme,”
Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., 513 U. S. 561, 569 (1995), and “ﬁt, if
possible, all parts into an harmonious whole,” FTC v. Mandel
Brothers, Inc., 359 U. S. 385, 389 (1959). Similarly, the
meaning of one statute may be affected by other Acts, partic-
ularly where Congress has spoken subsequently and more
speciﬁcally to the topic at hand. See United States v. Estate
of Romani, 523 U. S. 517, 530–531 (1998); United States v.
Fausto, 484 U. S. 439, 453 (1988).
In addition, we must be
guided to a degree by common sense as to the manner in
which Congress is likely to delegate a policy decision of such
economic and political magnitude to an administrative
agency. Cf. MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. American
Telephone & Telegraph Co., 512 U. S. 218, 231 (1994).

With these principles in mind, we ﬁnd that Congress has
directly spoken to the issue here and precluded the FDA’s
jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products.

A

Viewing the FDCA as a whole, it is evident that one of the
Act’s core objectives is to ensure that any product regulated
by the FDA is “safe” and “effective” for its intended use.
See 21 U. S. C. § 393(b)(2) (1994 ed., Supp. III) (deﬁning the
FDA’s mission); More Information for Better Patient Care:
Hearing before the Senate Committee on Labor and Human
Resources, 104th Cong., 2d Sess., 83 (1996) (statement of
FDA Deputy Comm’r Schultz) (“A fundamental precept of
drug and device regulation in this country is that these prod-
ucts must be proven safe and effective before they can be
sold”). This essential purpose pervades the FDCA. For
instance, 21 U. S. C. § 393(b)(2) (1994 ed., Supp. III) deﬁnes