Court Opinion

ID: 9490646
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 13:50:11.100803+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:54:13.822281
License: Public Domain

PLAGER, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
The statute plainly says what Sharp, the losing party in this case, says it says. Ordinarily that is more than sufficient for Sharp to have been the winner in this appeal. That the court arrives at the opposite conclusion illustrates only that this is one of those rare eases in which the purpose of Congress is so manifestly clear and the opposite result so silly, that to rule otherwise and require Congress to say it again with a few additional words would be even sillier. Though it is not the role of the courts to rewrite legislation to make it say what we think it should say, there are a few eases in which it may be proper for us to do so. Such cases involve no significant policy issues, but at most turn on the avoidance of a hyper-technical reading regarding which the Congressional purpose is beyond cavil. This is one of those rare cases.