A more thorough explanation:

Definition: To construe means to figure out what a written document (like a law or court decision) means based on the rules of legal interpretation. In the U.S. government, it's the job of the courts to construe what the law is. This means that judges have to decide what the law means, but they can't make new laws. There are two main ways that judges interpret laws: purposivism and textualism. Purposivists think that judges should interpret laws in a way that helps achieve the law's purpose, while textualists think that judges should only look at the words of the law itself.

Examples: Let's say that there's a law that says "No vehicles in the park." If someone gets in trouble for riding their bike in the park, a judge would have to construe what the law means. They might look at the plain meaning of the words "no vehicles" and decide that bikes count as vehicles. Or they might look at the context of the law and decide that it was only meant to apply to cars and trucks. They might also look at the legislative history of the law to see if there were any clues about what the lawmakers meant. Finally, they might look at how the law has been enforced in the past to see if there are any patterns.

Explanation: Construing a law is like trying to solve a puzzle. Judges have to look at all the pieces (like the words of the law, the context, and the history) to figure out what the puzzle is supposed to look like. The examples show how judges might use different tools to figure out what a law means. For example, looking at the plain meaning of the words is like looking at the picture on the puzzle box. Looking at the context is like looking at the other pieces around the one you're trying to place. Looking at the legislative history is like looking at the instructions that came with the puzzle. And looking at how the law has been enforced is like looking at other completed puzzles to see if they look similar.