The Bad Ways to Say “Because”

Dear Legal Writer: Before you give that brief to the partner, make sure you’re not using any of these BAD ways to say “because”:

I made this staircase for you, so you can see all of the 10 common ways we express causation:

🔺 As
🔺 For
🔺 Since
➖ Because
🔻 Based on
🔻 As a result of
🔻 For the reason that
🔻 On the grounds that
🔻 In light of the fact that
🔻 On account of the fact that

Notice how the options grow longer and more complex as you go down?

There’s one clue for which option is best.

Here’s my full analysis:

🔺 The 3 short words above the line (as, for, since) are too vague for legal analysis.

True, they may work in some Intros & Facts sections, depending on what you intend when you use them; they can add nuance and texture.

But for your Argument section, don’t use them to express causation: Each one simply means too many other things, making it ambiguous without more context.

For analysis, there is only one “because.”

🔻 The 5 long phrases at the bottom fare no better.

Occasionally you might prefer them for flow in preliminary sections, but know that when you do, you are adding CLUTTER.

You should always avoid them in your legal argument.

For analysis, there is only one “because.”

◾️ What about “based on”?

It’s not much longer than “because,” and we see it often in legal writing, so it can trip folks up.

The key things to know are that:

(1) in the law, we reserve “based on” for statutory language to describe the prohibited grounds for action, and

(2) legal scholars reject “based on” as a synonym for “because” in analytical prose.

➖ The Bottom Line ➖

For analysis, there’s only one “because.”

💌 Amanda

P.S. Next time you’re tempted to reach for a coy or fancy workaround, please pause, recall my Because Staircase, and find the sweet spot: Because.

#DearLegalWriter