assignment sentence and meaning

Sentences with Assignment: 53 Examples for Better English

Here we will practice 53 sentences with assignment so that you can see just how it is used in natural, smooth English! To improve your English, I would recommend reading and repeating all of these sentences enough times so that you can say them comfortably.

Sentences with assignment

Here are the first 10 sentences with assignment . Read and repeat them all. If any of the sentences are tricky to pronounce, say them slowly a few times so that you can build up confidence with them.

• The assignment was due at the end of the week.
• Lucy worked diligently on her assignment.
• Their assignment was to be completed in a team.
• The teacher gave a challenging assignment.
• His first assignment was to write an essay.
• Each assignment helps develop new skills.
• The assignment requirements were clearly outlined.
• Their group project assignment was innovative.
• She asked for help with her math assignment.
• The assignment deadline was moved up.

Related: Asset In A Sentence: 41 Examples For Successful English

What does assignment mean?

Assignment means a task or piece of work given to students or workers. It can be anything from a school homework task to a work-related job. It is an English noun. The verb form is assign . We use that like this:

• I will assign you a new task tomorrow.

Common Situations for Using the word Assignment

• School: Homework or projects given to students.
• Work: Tasks or projects given to employees.
• Tasks: Any specific duties assigned for completion.

Synonyms for Assignment and Example Sentences

Here are 3 common synonyms for assignment. It’s always good to learn different ways to say something, or at least words that are related in meaning!

• Meaning: A piece of work to be done.
• Example sentence: The managers assigned a new task to the team.
• Meaning: A moral or legal obligation; a responsibility.
• Example sentence: It was her duty to complete the task on time.
• Meaning: A paid position of regular employment.
• Example sentence: He has a job as a truck driver.

Related: Sentences With Aspect: 53 Examples For English Practice

Sentences with assignment: part 2

Here is the second set of examples for sentences with assignment. Keep reading and repeating them to better remember the words and sentence patterns.

• In sports, training is a regular assignment.
• The artist’s newest assignment was a large mural.
• There was a significant challenge in his assignment – the deadline was pushed forward.
• Changing the routine can sometimes improve assignment quality.
• The assignment was completed ahead of schedule.
• He recorded the assignment details in his notebook.
• The weather could delay the outdoor assignment.
• They celebrated finishing the big assignment.
• His approach to the assignment was unconventional.
• The final project assignment was to create a portfolio.

Assignment in a sentence

Here is the next set of sentences with assignment:

• Completing the assignment gave them confidence.
• He worked on his assignment every evening.
• A head start on the assignment prevents last-minute stress.
• The assignment requirements were confusing at first.
• The plot twist was an exciting assignment for the writer.
• A surprise assignment can be tough to handle.
• The story starts with the protagonist’s assignment.
• She reviewed the guidelines for her assignment.
• Project assignment details are posted online.
• Completing the assignment brought group unity.
• Starting a new assignment is an opportunity to grow.
• They watched a video related to their assignment.
• An assignment can open doors to new experiences.
• His journalistic assignment took him abroad.
• Maria finished her assignment.
• Their assignment went as expected.
• He planned the assignment timetable efficiently.
• Departure from routine can make an assignment interesting.
• They discussed the assignment in detail.
• The instructor prepared them for the difficult assignment.

Questions with assignment

Here are some questions that use the word assignment. Use them to practice English conversation with. Try to answer them in full sentences! Use your imagination to answer them if you need to.

• What is your current assignment?
• How long do you need to complete this assignment?
• What was the most challenging assignment you ever had?
• Can you think of a time when an assignment changed your perspective?
• What is the most memorable assignment you’ve completed?
• How does working on an assignment help you learn?
• Describe a situation where a group assignment was beneficial.
• Do you enjoy starting a new assignment? Why or why not?
• How do you plan your time when given a big assignment?
• What assignment are you looking forward to next?

A paragraph about assignments

Below you will find a paragraph about an experience regarding the word “assignment.” You can use this paragraph as a model if you have any writing assignments of your own.

Assignments can be both demanding and rewarding. I remember when I got my first major assignment in high school. It was an essay on the impacts of climate change. I felt overwhelmed at first. The topic was broad, and I didn’t know where to start. After doing some research, I divided the assignment into smaller tasks. Each day, I focused on a different section. Slowly but surely, the essay took shape. I felt a mix of stress and excitement while working on it. My friends and I sometimes discussed our assignments and shared tips. By the time I finished, I had learned so much about the topic and about writing. Turning in the completed assignment gave me a sense of achievement. It taught me that breaking down a task can make it more manageable. In the end, the assignment helped me grow academically and personally.

Sentences with assignment: a useful word to know!

I hope you have enjoyed reading and repeating all of these examples for sentences with assignment ! Here are a final 3 sentences using assignment, gradually getting trickier:

• What is the next assignment?
• When is the assignment due?
• This assignment requires careful attention to detail.

Look up a word, learn it forever.

/əˈsaɪnmənt/.

Other forms: assignments

Whether you’re an international spy with a new mission or a high school student with math homework — when you get an assignment , you’d better do it! An assignment is a task that someone in authority has asked you to do.

The word assignment is just the noun form of the common verb assign , which you use when you want to give someone a duty or a job. When you assign something, that something is called an assignment . The word can also refer to the act of distributing something. If you are distributing new office furniture at work, you might say, “ Assignment of the new chairs will begin tomorrow.”

• noun an undertaking that you have been assigned to do (as by an instructor) see more see less types: show 6 types... hide 6 types... school assignment , schoolwork a school task performed by a student to satisfy the teacher writing assignment , written assignment an assignment to write something classroom project a school task requiring considerable effort classwork the part of a student's work that is done in the classroom homework , prep , preparation preparatory school work done outside school (especially at home) lesson a task assigned for individual study type of: labor , project , task , undertaking any piece of work that is undertaken or attempted
• noun a duty that you are assigned to perform (especially in the armed forces) “a hazardous assignment ” synonyms: duty assignment see more see less types: show 10 types... hide 10 types... guard , guard duty , sentry duty , sentry go the duty of serving as a sentry fatigue , fatigue duty labor of a nonmilitary kind done by soldiers (cleaning or digging or draining or so on) charge , commission , mission a special assignment that is given to a person or group reassignment assignment to a different duty sea-duty , service abroad , shipboard duty naval service aboard a ship at sea shore duty naval service at land bases fool's errand a fruitless mission mission impossible an extremely dangerous or difficult mission martyr operation , sacrifice operation , suicide mission killing or injuring others while annihilating yourself; usually accomplished with a bomb secondment the detachment of a person from their regular organization for temporary assignment elsewhere type of: duty work that you are obliged to perform for moral or legal reasons
• noun the act of putting a person into a non-elective position synonyms: appointment , designation , naming see more see less types: show 6 types... hide 6 types... nomination the act of officially naming a candidate co-optation , co-option the act of appointing summarily (with or without the appointee's consent) delegacy the appointment of a delegate ordinance , ordination the act of ordaining; the act of conferring (or receiving) holy orders recognition designation by the chair granting a person the right to speak in a deliberative body laying on of hands laying hands on a person's head to invoke spiritual blessing in Christian ordination type of: conclusion , decision , determination the act of making up your mind about something
• noun the act of distributing something to designated places or persons “the first task is the assignment of an address to each datum” synonyms: assigning see more see less types: allocation , storage allocation (computer science) the assignment of particular areas of a magnetic disk to particular data or instructions type of: distribution the act of distributing or spreading or apportioning
• noun (law) a transfer of property by deed of conveyance synonyms: grant see more see less types: apanage , appanage a grant (by a sovereign or a legislative body) of resources to maintain a dependent member of a ruling family land grant a grant of public land (as to a railway or college) type of: transferred possession , transferred property a possession whose ownership changes or lapses
• noun the instrument by which a claim or right or interest or property is transferred from one person to another see more see less type of: instrument , legal document , legal instrument , official document (law) a document that states some contractual relationship or grants some right

Vocabulary lists containing assignment

The Dawes Act, or General Allotment Act of 1887, was a law that allowed the U.S. government to take Native American tribal lands and divide them into 40 acre lots for individual Native Americans. The goal was to break up communal tribal lands and speed the assimilation of Native Americans into American society. The Dawes Act caused great suffering with much of the land winding up in the hands of white settlers.

Learn these words from the autobiography by David Lubar (Inside: Level B, Unit 4). Here are our links to the selections of "Every Body Is a Winner": The Human Machine; My Fabulous Footprint , The Beat Goes On; All Pumped Up , Two Left Feet, Two Left Hands , How Coach Told Me; Bionics Here are our links to the units of Level B: Unit 1 , Unit 2 , Unit 3 , Unit 4 , Unit 5 , Unit 6 , Unit 7 , Unit 8 Here are our links to the Inside books: Level A , Level B , Level C Here is our link to a list of academic vocabulary for Inside: Academic Vocabulary

Prepare for the IELTS exam with this list of words related to education and academics.

Sign up now (it’s free!)

Whether you’re a teacher or a learner, vocabulary.com can put you or your class on the path to systematic vocabulary improvement..

• Dictionaries home
• American English
• Collocations
• German-English
• Grammar home
• Practical English Usage
• Learn & Practise Grammar (Beta)
• Word Lists home
• My Word Lists
• Recent additions
• Resources home
• Text Checker

Definition of assign verb from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary

• assign something (to somebody) The teacher assigned a different task to each of the children.
• The two large classrooms have been assigned to us.
• assign somebody something We have been assigned the two large classrooms.
• The teacher assigned each of the children a different task.

Definitions on the go

Look up any word in the dictionary offline, anytime, anywhere with the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary app.

• Britannica Homepage
• Ask the Editor
• Word of the Day
• Core Vocabulary
• Most Popular
• Browse the Dictionary
• My Saved Words
• assignment (noun)
• My assignment was to clean the equipment. = They gave me the assignment of cleaning the equipment.
• The students were given a homework assignment .
• The reporter's assignment is to interview the candidate.
• The reporter is here on an assignment .
• The reporter is here on assignment .
• The article discusses the recent assignment of senators to some of the more powerful committees.
• her assignment to the embassy in India
• the computer's assignment of a number to each image
• the assignment of blame/responsibility
• the assignment of property
• She asked if she could change her seating assignment .

• About Us & Legal Info
• Partner Program
• Privacy Notice
• Terms of Use
• Pronunciation Symbols

Sentences with Assignment

47 example sentences showcasing the meaning of 'assignment'.

The teacher gave us an assignment to write a short story about our favorite animal.

His history assignment required him to research and write an essay on the American Civil War.

She spent hours working on her science assignment , conducting experiments to understand the concept of photosynthesis.

Completing the coding assignment was challenging, requiring the students to develop a functional app by the end of the week.

Her assignment as the team leader was to ensure all project milestones were met within the specified timeframe.

As part of his military assignment , he was deployed overseas to serve in a peacekeeping mission.

Her assignment was to create an innovative marketing strategy to launch the new product in the market successfully.

The teacher handed out a math assignment to complete over the weekend.

His final assignment in history class was to write an essay about the Renaissance.

She was tasked with a challenging assignment on genetic mutations for her biology class.

His math assignment involved solving complex equations that challenged his problem-solving skills.

The news reporter's assignment was to cover the local elections and provide in-depth analysis on the candidates' policies.

The research scientist's assignment was to conduct experiments to test a new hypothesis related to climate change.

Her assignment as a volunteer was to assist in organizing a charity event for homeless shelters in the city.

Completing the coding assignment required them to debug and optimize existing software code for a smoother user experience.

The architect's assignment was to design a sustainable and eco-friendly building for the upcoming urban development project.

The diplomat's assignment was to negotiate a peace agreement between two conflicting nations to end the ongoing dispute.

As part of his internship, his assignment was to shadow different departments and gain a comprehensive understanding of the company's operations.

The kindergarten teacher gave a coloring assignment to practice identifying primary colors.

His geography assignment required him to create a detailed map highlighting various geographical features of South America.

The chef's assignment for the day was to prepare a three-course meal showcasing local ingredients for a food festival.

Completing the coding assignment involved creating a website from scratch using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.

The astronaut's assignment was to conduct experiments on the International Space Station to study the effects of zero gravity on plant growth.

As part of their psychology assignment , they had to conduct interviews and analyze human behavior patterns in a real-life setting.

The music student's assignment was to compose an original piece for the orchestra's upcoming performance.

Her assignment as an environmentalist was to educate communities on sustainable practices to conserve water resources.

The kindergarten assignment to learn the alphabet involved singing songs and practicing letter recognition.

His economics assignment involved analyzing the factors affecting supply and demand in the local market.

The biologist's assignment was to classify and identify new species discovered in the remote rainforest.

Her assignment as a freelance writer was to craft engaging content for a travel magazine highlighting exotic destinations.

The engineer's assignment was to design and prototype an innovative solution for renewable energy production.

Completing the coding assignment required understanding algorithms to develop a machine learning model for data prediction.

The surgeon's assignment was to perform a series of intricate surgeries over the week to address a medical emergency.

As part of his sociology assignment , he conducted fieldwork to study societal behaviors within diverse cultural communities.

The astronomer's assignment was to observe and document the movement of celestial bodies using the observatory's telescope.

Related Words

Cite this word, contribute your sentence, was this helpful.

Sign Up or Sign In to contribute!

Understanding Assignments

What this handout is about.

The first step in any successful college writing venture is reading the assignment. While this sounds like a simple task, it can be a tough one. This handout will help you unravel your assignment and begin to craft an effective response. Much of the following advice will involve translating typical assignment terms and practices into meaningful clues to the type of writing your instructor expects. See our short video for more tips.

Basic beginnings

Regardless of the assignment, department, or instructor, adopting these two habits will serve you well :

• Read the assignment carefully as soon as you receive it. Do not put this task off—reading the assignment at the beginning will save you time, stress, and problems later. An assignment can look pretty straightforward at first, particularly if the instructor has provided lots of information. That does not mean it will not take time and effort to complete; you may even have to learn a new skill to complete the assignment.
• Ask the instructor about anything you do not understand. Do not hesitate to approach your instructor. Instructors would prefer to set you straight before you hand the paper in. That’s also when you will find their feedback most useful.

Assignment formats

Many assignments follow a basic format. Assignments often begin with an overview of the topic, include a central verb or verbs that describe the task, and offer some additional suggestions, questions, or prompts to get you started.

An Overview of Some Kind

The instructor might set the stage with some general discussion of the subject of the assignment, introduce the topic, or remind you of something pertinent that you have discussed in class. For example:

“Throughout history, gerbils have played a key role in politics,” or “In the last few weeks of class, we have focused on the evening wear of the housefly …”

The Task of the Assignment

Pay attention; this part tells you what to do when you write the paper. Look for the key verb or verbs in the sentence. Words like analyze, summarize, or compare direct you to think about your topic in a certain way. Also pay attention to words such as how, what, when, where, and why; these words guide your attention toward specific information. (See the section in this handout titled “Key Terms” for more information.)

“Analyze the effect that gerbils had on the Russian Revolution”, or “Suggest an interpretation of housefly undergarments that differs from Darwin’s.”

Additional Material to Think about

Here you will find some questions to use as springboards as you begin to think about the topic. Instructors usually include these questions as suggestions rather than requirements. Do not feel compelled to answer every question unless the instructor asks you to do so. Pay attention to the order of the questions. Sometimes they suggest the thinking process your instructor imagines you will need to follow to begin thinking about the topic.

“You may wish to consider the differing views held by Communist gerbils vs. Monarchist gerbils, or Can there be such a thing as ‘the housefly garment industry’ or is it just a home-based craft?”

These are the instructor’s comments about writing expectations:

“Be concise”, “Write effectively”, or “Argue furiously.”

Technical Details

These instructions usually indicate format rules or guidelines.

“Your paper must be typed in Palatino font on gray paper and must not exceed 600 pages. It is due on the anniversary of Mao Tse-tung’s death.”

The assignment’s parts may not appear in exactly this order, and each part may be very long or really short. Nonetheless, being aware of this standard pattern can help you understand what your instructor wants you to do.

Interpreting the assignment

Ask yourself a few basic questions as you read and jot down the answers on the assignment sheet:

Why did your instructor ask you to do this particular task?

Who is your audience.

• What kind of evidence do you need to support your ideas?

What kind of writing style is acceptable?

• What are the absolute rules of the paper?

Try to look at the question from the point of view of the instructor. Recognize that your instructor has a reason for giving you this assignment and for giving it to you at a particular point in the semester. In every assignment, the instructor has a challenge for you. This challenge could be anything from demonstrating an ability to think clearly to demonstrating an ability to use the library. See the assignment not as a vague suggestion of what to do but as an opportunity to show that you can handle the course material as directed. Paper assignments give you more than a topic to discuss—they ask you to do something with the topic. Keep reminding yourself of that. Be careful to avoid the other extreme as well: do not read more into the assignment than what is there.

Of course, your instructor has given you an assignment so that they will be able to assess your understanding of the course material and give you an appropriate grade. But there is more to it than that. Your instructor has tried to design a learning experience of some kind. Your instructor wants you to think about something in a particular way for a particular reason. If you read the course description at the beginning of your syllabus, review the assigned readings, and consider the assignment itself, you may begin to see the plan, purpose, or approach to the subject matter that your instructor has created for you. If you still aren’t sure of the assignment’s goals, try asking the instructor. For help with this, see our handout on getting feedback .

Given your instructor’s efforts, it helps to answer the question: What is my purpose in completing this assignment? Is it to gather research from a variety of outside sources and present a coherent picture? Is it to take material I have been learning in class and apply it to a new situation? Is it to prove a point one way or another? Key words from the assignment can help you figure this out. Look for key terms in the form of active verbs that tell you what to do.

Key Terms: Finding Those Active Verbs

Here are some common key words and definitions to help you think about assignment terms:

Information words Ask you to demonstrate what you know about the subject, such as who, what, when, where, how, and why.

• define —give the subject’s meaning (according to someone or something). Sometimes you have to give more than one view on the subject’s meaning
• describe —provide details about the subject by answering question words (such as who, what, when, where, how, and why); you might also give details related to the five senses (what you see, hear, feel, taste, and smell)
• explain —give reasons why or examples of how something happened
• illustrate —give descriptive examples of the subject and show how each is connected with the subject
• summarize —briefly list the important ideas you learned about the subject
• trace —outline how something has changed or developed from an earlier time to its current form
• research —gather material from outside sources about the subject, often with the implication or requirement that you will analyze what you have found

Relation words Ask you to demonstrate how things are connected.

• compare —show how two or more things are similar (and, sometimes, different)
• contrast —show how two or more things are dissimilar
• apply—use details that you’ve been given to demonstrate how an idea, theory, or concept works in a particular situation
• cause —show how one event or series of events made something else happen
• relate —show or describe the connections between things

Interpretation words Ask you to defend ideas of your own about the subject. Do not see these words as requesting opinion alone (unless the assignment specifically says so), but as requiring opinion that is supported by concrete evidence. Remember examples, principles, definitions, or concepts from class or research and use them in your interpretation.

• assess —summarize your opinion of the subject and measure it against something
• prove, justify —give reasons or examples to demonstrate how or why something is the truth
• evaluate, respond —state your opinion of the subject as good, bad, or some combination of the two, with examples and reasons
• support —give reasons or evidence for something you believe (be sure to state clearly what it is that you believe)
• synthesize —put two or more things together that have not been put together in class or in your readings before; do not just summarize one and then the other and say that they are similar or different—you must provide a reason for putting them together that runs all the way through the paper
• analyze —determine how individual parts create or relate to the whole, figure out how something works, what it might mean, or why it is important
• argue —take a side and defend it with evidence against the other side

More Clues to Your Purpose As you read the assignment, think about what the teacher does in class:

• What kinds of textbooks or coursepack did your instructor choose for the course—ones that provide background information, explain theories or perspectives, or argue a point of view?
• In lecture, does your instructor ask your opinion, try to prove their point of view, or use keywords that show up again in the assignment?
• What kinds of assignments are typical in this discipline? Social science classes often expect more research. Humanities classes thrive on interpretation and analysis.
• How do the assignments, readings, and lectures work together in the course? Instructors spend time designing courses, sometimes even arguing with their peers about the most effective course materials. Figuring out the overall design to the course will help you understand what each assignment is meant to achieve.

Now, what about your reader? Most undergraduates think of their audience as the instructor. True, your instructor is a good person to keep in mind as you write. But for the purposes of a good paper, think of your audience as someone like your roommate: smart enough to understand a clear, logical argument, but not someone who already knows exactly what is going on in your particular paper. Remember, even if the instructor knows everything there is to know about your paper topic, they still have to read your paper and assess your understanding. In other words, teach the material to your reader.

Aiming a paper at your audience happens in two ways: you make decisions about the tone and the level of information you want to convey.

• Tone means the “voice” of your paper. Should you be chatty, formal, or objective? Usually you will find some happy medium—you do not want to alienate your reader by sounding condescending or superior, but you do not want to, um, like, totally wig on the man, you know? Eschew ostentatious erudition: some students think the way to sound academic is to use big words. Be careful—you can sound ridiculous, especially if you use the wrong big words.
• The level of information you use depends on who you think your audience is. If you imagine your audience as your instructor and they already know everything you have to say, you may find yourself leaving out key information that can cause your argument to be unconvincing and illogical. But you do not have to explain every single word or issue. If you are telling your roommate what happened on your favorite science fiction TV show last night, you do not say, “First a dark-haired white man of average height, wearing a suit and carrying a flashlight, walked into the room. Then a purple alien with fifteen arms and at least three eyes turned around. Then the man smiled slightly. In the background, you could hear a clock ticking. The room was fairly dark and had at least two windows that I saw.” You also do not say, “This guy found some aliens. The end.” Find some balance of useful details that support your main point.

You’ll find a much more detailed discussion of these concepts in our handout on audience .

The Grim Truth

With a few exceptions (including some lab and ethnography reports), you are probably being asked to make an argument. You must convince your audience. It is easy to forget this aim when you are researching and writing; as you become involved in your subject matter, you may become enmeshed in the details and focus on learning or simply telling the information you have found. You need to do more than just repeat what you have read. Your writing should have a point, and you should be able to say it in a sentence. Sometimes instructors call this sentence a “thesis” or a “claim.”

So, if your instructor tells you to write about some aspect of oral hygiene, you do not want to just list: “First, you brush your teeth with a soft brush and some peanut butter. Then, you floss with unwaxed, bologna-flavored string. Finally, gargle with bourbon.” Instead, you could say, “Of all the oral cleaning methods, sandblasting removes the most plaque. Therefore it should be recommended by the American Dental Association.” Or, “From an aesthetic perspective, moldy teeth can be quite charming. However, their joys are short-lived.”

Convincing the reader of your argument is the goal of academic writing. It doesn’t have to say “argument” anywhere in the assignment for you to need one. Look at the assignment and think about what kind of argument you could make about it instead of just seeing it as a checklist of information you have to present. For help with understanding the role of argument in academic writing, see our handout on argument .

What kind of evidence do you need?

There are many kinds of evidence, and what type of evidence will work for your assignment can depend on several factors–the discipline, the parameters of the assignment, and your instructor’s preference. Should you use statistics? Historical examples? Do you need to conduct your own experiment? Can you rely on personal experience? See our handout on evidence for suggestions on how to use evidence appropriately.

Make sure you are clear about this part of the assignment, because your use of evidence will be crucial in writing a successful paper. You are not just learning how to argue; you are learning how to argue with specific types of materials and ideas. Ask your instructor what counts as acceptable evidence. You can also ask a librarian for help. No matter what kind of evidence you use, be sure to cite it correctly—see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial .

You cannot always tell from the assignment just what sort of writing style your instructor expects. The instructor may be really laid back in class but still expect you to sound formal in writing. Or the instructor may be fairly formal in class and ask you to write a reflection paper where you need to use “I” and speak from your own experience.

Try to avoid false associations of a particular field with a style (“art historians like wacky creativity,” or “political scientists are boring and just give facts”) and look instead to the types of readings you have been given in class. No one expects you to write like Plato—just use the readings as a guide for what is standard or preferable to your instructor. When in doubt, ask your instructor about the level of formality they expect.

No matter what field you are writing for or what facts you are including, if you do not write so that your reader can understand your main idea, you have wasted your time. So make clarity your main goal. For specific help with style, see our handout on style .

Technical details about the assignment

The technical information you are given in an assignment always seems like the easy part. This section can actually give you lots of little hints about approaching the task. Find out if elements such as page length and citation format (see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial ) are negotiable. Some professors do not have strong preferences as long as you are consistent and fully answer the assignment. Some professors are very specific and will deduct big points for deviations.

Usually, the page length tells you something important: The instructor thinks the size of the paper is appropriate to the assignment’s parameters. In plain English, your instructor is telling you how many pages it should take for you to answer the question as fully as you are expected to. So if an assignment is two pages long, you cannot pad your paper with examples or reword your main idea several times. Hit your one point early, defend it with the clearest example, and finish quickly. If an assignment is ten pages long, you can be more complex in your main points and examples—and if you can only produce five pages for that assignment, you need to see someone for help—as soon as possible.

Tricks that don’t work

Your instructors are not fooled when you:

• spend more time on the cover page than the essay —graphics, cool binders, and cute titles are no replacement for a well-written paper.
• use huge fonts, wide margins, or extra spacing to pad the page length —these tricks are immediately obvious to the eye. Most instructors use the same word processor you do. They know what’s possible. Such tactics are especially damning when the instructor has a stack of 60 papers to grade and yours is the only one that low-flying airplane pilots could read.
• use a paper from another class that covered “sort of similar” material . Again, the instructor has a particular task for you to fulfill in the assignment that usually relates to course material and lectures. Your other paper may not cover this material, and turning in the same paper for more than one course may constitute an Honor Code violation . Ask the instructor—it can’t hurt.
• get all wacky and “creative” before you answer the question . Showing that you are able to think beyond the boundaries of a simple assignment can be good, but you must do what the assignment calls for first. Again, check with your instructor. A humorous tone can be refreshing for someone grading a stack of papers, but it will not get you a good grade if you have not fulfilled the task.

Critical reading of assignments leads to skills in other types of reading and writing. If you get good at figuring out what the real goals of assignments are, you are going to be better at understanding the goals of all of your classes and fields of study.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Supreme Court presidential immunity ruling shakes up the Biden-Trump conversation

WASHINGTON - Former President Donald Trump got an important political and legal win . President Joe Biden got a much needed post-debate change of subject .

The Supreme Court's decision on Monday giving Trump limited immunity from prosecution for presidential acts means the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee - already a convicted felon - will not be tried during the campaign on charges that he tried to steal the 2020 election from Biden.

"Now I am free to campaign like anyone else," Trump told Fox News Digital in the immediate aftermath of the landmark 6-3 opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts.

Meanwhile, the Biden team - still in damage control over his shaky debate performance last Thursday that has fomented widespread calls for the incumbent Democratic president to get out of the 2024 White House race - reacted to the decision by reviving the basic issue: Trump's role in the insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021, which followed his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Biden.

"Trump is already running for president as a convicted felon for the very same reason he sat idly by while the mob violently attacked the Capitol," said a Biden campaign statement. "He thinks he’s above the law and is willing to do anything to gain and hold onto power for himself."

Trump moves forward

Legal issues will continue to dog the Trump campaign, but there won't be as many of them thanks to the Supreme Court.

The former president does face a July 11 sentencing date in the hush money case. A judge could sentence him to prison, although he is appealing the verdict and likely won't face a day behind bars.

Trump has also been staring at a potential criminal trial in Washington, D.C., on federal charges that he conspired to try and steal the 2020 election from Biden . But that now looks very unlikely. Trump can always appeal any ruling from the federal district court judge overseeing his case that found his actions - including pressuring state and federal officials to change electoral votes - do not constitute "official acts." That move would likewise further delay a trial, which as of now doesn't even have a start date listed on the court docket.

If Trump wins the presidential election and takes office, he can order the Justice Department to have his federal case dismissed - a move that no doubt would prompt widespread political pushback from Democrats.

Trump will be tried on federal Jan. 6 charges "only if he loses in November, and even then it’ll take probably two years," said Bradley P. Moss, a Washington lawyer who specializes in national security cases.

No more courtrooms for Trump

It stands to reason: No trial, no real damage to Trump's campaign.

"Once he's sentenced in New York, that's the last we'll see of Trump in a courtroom, right?" said Republican strategist Scott Jennings.

Jennings, a CNN commentator, said voters "have already processed January 6 and related issues, and have already taken into account of whether they will do Trump again. So not much, to be honest."

Trump also faces two other possible trials: A Georgia state case that also alleges he conspired to steal the 2020 election, and a Florida federal case involving the mishandling of classified documents .

Pre-trial maneuvering has delayed both of those trials, likely beyond Election Day on Nov. 5.

The Biden campaign: Trump is still responsible for Jan. 6

After a poor debate performance that inspired even some supporters to suggest Biden drop out of the race, the president's campaign sought to use the Supreme Court decision to reframe the debate.

While there won't be a Trump trial before the Election Day, Biden supporters said, the issue remains: the former president fomented an insurrection and still poses a threat to democracy, and voters should hold him accountable.

In its statement, the Biden campaign said Trump "snapped after he lost the 2020 election" and has become more unhinged this time around.

"He’s promising to be a dictator ‘on day one,’ calling for our Constitution to be ‘terminated’ so he can regain power, and promising a 'bloodbath' if he loses," the Biden campaign said.

Is Trump's legal calendar clear?

This isn't the first time this year the Supreme Court has altered the legal/political calendar.

The federal Jan. 6 case was on schedule to start this March, but it got pushed back after the high court decided to review Trump's pre-trial appeal. At that point, prosecutors in New York opted to move forward with the hush money case against Trump.

On May 30, a jury convicted Trump of false reporting of hush money payments to Stormy Daniels , all in an effort to keep voters from learning about his encounter with the adult film actress right before the 2016 presidential election.

There is scant evidence that the New York case has had much of an effect on the Biden-Trump race.

Polls say the race race is virtually tied, although both campaigns are anxiously reviewing new data to asses the impact - if any - on Biden's shaky performance at last week's debate.

Julie Chrisley's Prison Sentence for Bank Fraud and Tax Evasion Case Overturned by Appeals Court

Julie chrisley's prison sentence has been vacated by an appeals court after judges determined there was insufficient evidence in her and todd chrisley's bank fraud case..

Julie Chrisley 's legal journey has a new development. 

The  Chrisley Knows Best  alum's seven-year prison sentence in Kentucky for tax evasion and bank fraud was overturned June 21 after a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the judge in the 2022 trial miscalculated Julie's sentence.

Though the panel upheld Julie's,  Todd Chrisley 's and their accountant  Peter Tarantino 's convictions, they found there was insufficient evidence to support the ruling that Julie was involved in the entirety of the bank fraud scheme, as seen in court documents obtained by E! News . Instead, the judges determined there was insufficient evidence to prove she was involved in the scheme, which began in 2006, before 2007.

"The district court did not identify the evidence it relied on to hold Julie accountable for losses incurred before 2007, and we cannot independently find it in the record," the judges stated in their ruling. "So we vacate Julie's sentence and remand solely for the district court to make the factual findings and calculations necessary to determine loss, restitution, and forfeiture as to Julie and to resentence her accordingly."

Julie's case will now be handed to a lower court to determine how her sentencing will be adjusted per the new ruling. Todd's 12-year sentence—which was reduced to 10 years in September —has not been affected.

Following the update in the case, the family's counsel told E! News, "We're pleased that the Court agreed that Julie's sentence was improper, but we're obviously disappointed that it rejected Todd's appeal."

"With this step behind us, we can now challenge the couple's convictions based on the illegal search that started the case," the statement continued, appearing to refer to the misconduct case the couple  settled earlier this year. "The family appreciates the continued support they've received throughout this process. And they're hopeful for more good news in the future."

The judges' ruling comes six months after Julie and Todd, who reported to their respective prisons in January 2023 , received a $1 million settlement from the state of Georgia after suing former special investigator Joshua Waites for misconduct in his handling of their investigation. 

The settlement was awarded in January after a Sept. 2021 report from Atlanta's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) supported Todd's claim "he was unfairly targeted for investigation due to his 'celebrity status."

The OIG's investigation found photos of Joshua posing on the Chrisley's seized furniture, as well as messages bragging about having done so. The report's findings also said Joshua's office filed an improper request with the U.S. Treasury Department to access the reality TV stars' bank accounts.

Despite the allegations of misconduct, however, in June 2022 Todd and Julie were found guilty on 12 counts , including charges of wire fraud, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States. They began their sentences in January 2023, which were each shortened in September —with Julie's seven-year sentence dropping to five in addition to Todd's changing to 10. 

"Without a doubt," Jay Surgent , an attorney for the couple, told  Insider  at the time, "Todd and Julie are model incarcerated individuals who received exorbitant sentences." 

Keep reading for a look back at the Chrisley family.

Chrisley Knows Best stars  Julie Chrisley and Todd Chrisley smiled for a professional photo together in 2016.

Todd and Julie were pictured along with Faye Chrisley , Chase Chrisley , Savannah Chrisley , Chloe Chrisley   and  Grayson Chrisley  ahead of season eight of their reality show.

The spouses attended the 2014 Television Critics Association summer press tour in Beverly Hills, Calif. 

The pair hit the red carpet for the 2017 Academy Of Country Music Awards in Las Vegas.

Lindsie Chrisley —whose parents are Todd and Teresa Terry —joined her dad, Savannah and Julie at the 2015 Concert For Love And Acceptance at City Winery Nashville.

Savannah and Chase snapped a pic together in 2019 for E! News' Daily Pop .

The couple appeared with granddaughter Chloe, who they adopted, on the "Build A Baby" episode in 2020.

Todd and Julie appeared with their daughter Savannah on Hollywood Game Night in 2018 for the "Chrisley's Believe It Or Not" episode.

The real estate mogul and his daughter were among the stars at the 2016 Academy of Country Music Awards in Las Vegas.

Todd and Julie kept their kids Savannah and Chase close at the 2015 NBCUniversal Cable Entertainment Upfront in New York City.

Todd and Julie were spotted at the 2019 grand opening of E3 Chophouse Nashville in Nashville, Tenn.

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Examples of assignment

Word of the Day

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

an area of land that has not been used to grow crops or had towns and roads built on it, especially because it is difficult to live in as a result of its extremely cold or hot weather or bad earth

Fakes and forgeries (Things that are not what they seem to be)

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists

{{message}}

There was a problem sending your report.

• Collocations

• Frank Cerabino
• Nation & World
• Fort Lauderdale

Plea deal spares Jupiter mom Tracy Ferriter from prison in aggravated child-abuse case

Jupiter police arrested tracy and timothy ferriter on aggravated child abuse charges in february 2022, a month after their child ran away from home..

WEST PALM BEACH — A Jupiter mother accused of confining her adopted teenage child for hours at a time in a box-like structure in the garage of the family's home will avoid going to trial — and likely to state prison — after she entered guilty pleas on multiple charges Monday.

Tracy Ferriter pleaded guilty to one count each of aggravated child abuse, false imprisonment and child neglect during a hearing before Circuit Judge Howard Coates at the Palm Beach County Courthouse in West Palm Beach. Her pleas brought to an end a case that drew international attention when Jupiter police arrested Ferriter and her husband, Timothy, in February 2022.

Coates placed Ferriter on 10 years of probation for the child-abuse charge and ordered that she serve concurrent five-year probation sentences on the other two charges. He also ordered that she undergo a mental-health evaluation and that she complete 300 hours of community service, among other terms.

Coates granted permission for Ferriter, 48, to petition to have her probation transferred to Cook County, Illinois, in the Chicago area, indicating she may soon move away from South Florida.

He prohibited contact with the child at the center of the abuse allegations. Ferriter, accompanied by her attorneys Marc Shiner and Heidi Perlet, answered questions from Coates regarding her acceptance of the plea but did not further address the court.

'It's dehumanizing': 'It's dehumanizing': Jupiter teen forced to live in garage room tells jurors about experience

Child abuse took place at Ferriter family's home in Jupiter's Egret Landing community

Tracy Ferriter faced the same charges as her husband, Timothy, who a jury found guilty on Oct. 12. A month later, Coates sentenced him to five years in state prison, followed by five years of probation. He earlier had agreed to try them separately, and Tracy Ferriter's case was briefly delayed while she found an attorney to handle it.

The abuse took place at the Ferriters' home in Jupiter's Egret Landing neighborhood, a circle of middle-class homes off Central Boulevard south of Indiantown Road.

Jupiter police began their investigation when the child, whom The Palm Beach Post has not identified, was reported as a runaway in January 2022. They found an 8-foot-by-8-foot room in the garage where the child was kept for long stretches each day. It had a lock that could be opened only from the outside. The teenage child was provided a bucket to use as a toilet, prosecutors said.

The child told jurors that the pattern of abusive actions lasted for about six weeks following the Ferriter family's move to Jupiter from Arizona in late December 2021. They previously had lived at another house in Egret Landing before moving west.

The revelations fueled attention far beyond South Florida, with the Court TV cable channel even dedicating hourlong segments to the case.

'They were in such a rush': After arrests, Florida couple demolished garage room where teen lived

Timothy and Tracy Ferriter told police prior to their arrests in February 2022 that the teen had lied, stolen, attacked family members, and threatened classmates. The room was a means to discipline the teen and protect other people in the household from harm, they said.

An older sibling, who was also adopted, testified at Timothy Ferriter's trial that the teen received harsher punishments from their parents than other children in the home.

The teen had a history of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, and a condition known as reactive attachment disorder, Tracy Ferriter told investigators prior to her arrest.

Reactive attachment disorder can keep children from forming healthy bonds with their family members, and it can lead to the children acting out or making it difficult for them to accept love.

Tracy Ferriter's plea deal brings quiet end to story that drew international attention

Monday's plea conference lacked the drama of Timothy Ferriter's sentencing hearing on Nov. 15. The plea hearing lasted for about 16 minutes and largely consisted of Coates reviewing the terms of the agreement with Tracy Ferriter.

At Timothy Ferriter's sentencing, the 49-year-old spoke for about 10 minutes, addressing his wife and each of the couple's four children individually and apologizing for what they have had to endure during the past couple of years.

He pleaded with Coates to "lean into mercy" in determining his sentence.

"Everything I did was out of love," he told the court.

In his final remarks before sentencing Timothy Ferriter, Coates said he found that the father of four engaged in conduct that was "calculating, methodical and planned" in confining the child as a means of punishment.

"There were plenty of opportunities that the defendant had to reflect on whether what he was doing was wrong," Coates said. "It appears that he never took the time to reflect, and he never concluded that what he was doing was wrong."

The teen at the center of the abuse also spoke during Timothy Ferriter's sentencing, requesting that the court show leniency.

"My father was a good person who just made a really serious mistake," the teen said. "He was not a bad parent."

Julius Whigham II is a criminal justice and public safety reporter for The Palm Beach Post. You can reach him at [email protected] and follow him on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, at @JuliusWhigham . Help support our work: Subscribe today.  

Steve Bannon remains defiant just days before reporting to prison

Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon on Saturday continued to defend the actions that resulted in his prison sentence.

In an interview with NBC News, Bannon continued to assert that the Jan. 6 committee’s subpoenas “don’t mean anything” and reiterated arguments about executive privilege that have been rejected in courts.

The vocal ally of former President Donald Trump is set to report to prison by Monday to serve a four-month sentence for defying subpoenas to appear before Congress during the investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Though Bannon was convicted in 2022, his sentence was put on hold while he sought to appeal the convictions. A last-ditch effort to appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected earlier this week , meaning Bannon has to report to prison by July 1.

When asked what his endgame is, Bannon told NBC News it was “victory or death of this republic.”

“If we don’t win the — first of all, they shred the Constitution. It is the death of the constitutional American republic we know,” he continued.

It’s a claim he made earlier this month during his speech at the conservative Turning Point USA conference.

“Ladies and gentleman, it’s very simple: victory or death!” Bannon said during his speech as the audience cheered.

Bannon’s prison sentence stems from being held in contempt of Congress after defying the Jan. 6 committee’s request for testimony and documents. White House records had shown that Bannon had multiple conversations with Trump on or immediately before Jan. 6.

He continued to reject a question from NBC News about the content of those conversations, calling them “personal and private” and pointing to executive privilege claims, which t he Jan. 6 committee said would not prevent him from having to testify.

Bannon remains a staunch ally of the former president and continues to peddle false claims about 2020 election fraud.

Former Trump adviser Peter Navarro has remained behind bars since March on a four-month prison sentence. Navarro was convicted of the same charges as Bannon.

Vaughn Hillyard is a correspondent for NBC News. 

Dan Gallo is an MSNBC field producer based in New York. 

Alexandra Marquez is a politics reporter for NBC News.

Megan Lebowitz is a politics reporter for NBC News.

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

assignation

Definition of assignation

• appointment

Examples of assignation in a Sentence

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'assignation.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

15th century, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Dictionary Entries Near assignation

assigned risk

Cite this Entry

“Assignation.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assignation. Accessed 2 Jul. 2024.

More from Merriam-Webster on assignation

Nglish: Translation of assignation for Spanish Speakers

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

Plural and possessive names: a guide, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, it's a scorcher words for the summer heat, flower etymologies for your spring garden, 12 star wars words, 'swash', 'praya', and 12 more beachy words, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, games & quizzes.

Highlights of the Supreme Court Ruling on Obstruction Charge in Jan. 6 Case

The decision concerned the scope of an obstruction charge to address accounting fraud and the destruction of evidence. Among the defendants facing it is former President Donald Trump.

• Share full article

Adam Liptak

In addition to ruling that federal prosecutors had overstepped in using an obstruction law to prosecute a Jan. 6 rioter, the Supreme Court on Friday issued decisions in two other closely watched cases: upholding a city’s laws aimed at banning homeless residents from sleeping outdoors and cutting back on the power of executive agencies . (Because of an editing error, this post erroneously said the court limited cities efforts to regulate homelessness.)

Charlie Savage

My colleague Alan Feuer already made this point below, but it is worth emphasizing so it does not get buried in other observations: this ruling may not require dropping the obstruction charge against Trump. The accusations against him include a scheme to concoct illegitimate documents to disrupt Congress’s proceeding of counting electoral college votes — namely, fake elector ballots “cast” for Trump by fake electors from states that Biden won.

Read the Court’s Ruling on Jan. 6 Obstruction

The court ruled in favor of a former police officer seeking to throw out an obstruction charge for participating in the riot on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Advertisement

Eileen Sullivan

The defendant at the heart of the case, Joseph W. Fischer, was released from prison on his own recognizance in February 2021. In March, the Justice Department asked the court to change the condition of his release because of threats they say he made on social media to a local public official. In a private message in February on social media, Fischer wrote to the official, “If you believed one word from your FBI buddy, then you’re really stupid. When I win, your name will be one of the first on my lips. You’re already in my book.” There hasn't been a decision on the government’s request yet.

One of the criminal statutes that is likely to take the place of the obstruction count as a tool prosecutors use to hold some of the most disruptive rioters accountable is 18 U.S.C. 231. That statute makes it a crime to interfere with or impede law enforcement during a civil disorder. But where the obstruction count carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, the civil disorder count carries a five-year maximum.

Many of the crimes that Jan. 6 defendants have faced have been quite straightforward: assault, trespassing, vandalism. Not so, this obstruction count. Until now, it had been used to describe the often hard-to-pin down situation in which a rioter caused the election certification proceeding to be disrupted. And prosecutors had fairly wide latitude in describing how that disruption was defined.

Rioters who made it all way to the floor of the Senate, say, were often charged with obstruction. So, too, were rioters who showed some understanding — through text messages or Facebook posts — that their actions were intended to disrupt the certification proceeding.

One of the interesting things about the ruling is that while it was a now-familiar 6-3 vote, one of the conservatives, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, wanted to uphold the broader interpretation of the obstruction law as covering the Jan. 6 rioters, while one of the liberals, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, sided with the remaining five conservatives in narrowing its reach to impairing the integrity of documents or other physical objects used in a proceeding.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had foreshadowed her skepticism during the oral arguments, saying that the court should not lose sight of “the backdrop of a real-world context” that Congress wrote the law after the document destruction in the Enron scandal. “There was nothing as far as I can tell in the enactment history as it was recorded that suggests that Congress was thinking about obstruction more generally,” she said.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett had not shown her hand so clearly during the arguments. At one point, however, she did suggest that one could be comfortable embracing the government’s broader reading of the statute by saying that it might be unconstitutional under the First Amendment if prosecutors tried to apply it too aggressively. (Her dissenting opinion did not get into that possibility as a potential limiting factor.)

The obstruction count the court narrowed today has always been an awkward fit for what happened at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Then again, prosecutors faced a difficult task in looking for a law that could hold accountable rioters who disrupted the heart of the democratic process by storming the Capitol on Jan. 6.

The Justice Department reached for this statute in part because it was written somewhat vaguely and appeared to cover almost any kind of obstruction of an official proceeding — in this case, the election certification that was taking place at the Capitol. But in its ruling, the Supreme Court decided that move was an overreach.

Thomas and Alito took part in the case despite calls for their recusal.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., rejecting calls for their disqualification, participated in the case, siding with a member of the mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices’ wives raised serious questions about their impartiality.

Virginia Thomas, known as Ginny, helped shape the effort to overturn the 2020 election. “Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History,” Ms. Thomas wrote in a text message to Mark Meadows, President Donald J. Trump’s chief of staff, during the fraught weeks between the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 attack.

Justice Thomas has not given a public explanation for remaining on the case, and he has taken part in other cases arising from the election and the 2021 attack. But he recused himself in October from a case concerning John Eastman, a conservative lawyer who had advised Mr. Trump. Justice Thomas, for whom Mr. Eastman had served as a law clerk, gave no reasons for his decision to disqualify himself from that case.

Justice Alito has been more forthcoming. He explained why he would not recuse from the case in a letter to Democratic lawmakers in May after The New York Times reported that flags that have been used to support the “Stop the Steal” movement had been displayed at his homes in Virginia and New Jersey .

The justice said his wife, Martha-Ann, was responsible. “My wife is fond of flying flags,” he wrote. “I am not. She was solely responsible for having flagpoles put up at our residence and our vacation home and has flown a wide variety of flags over the years.”

The court recently adopted a code of conduct for the justices . It allows individual justices to make their own decisions about recusal.

One provision of the code says that “a justice is presumed impartial and has an obligation to sit unless disqualified.”

A second provision says that “a justice should disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the justice’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, that is, where an unbiased and reasonable person who is aware of all relevant circumstances would doubt that the justice could fairly discharge his or her duties.”

The flags displayed at his properties, Justice Alito wrote, did not require him to recuse from the case. “A reasonable person who is not motivated by political or ideological considerations or a desire to affect the outcome of Supreme Court cases,” he wrote, “would conclude this event does not meet the applicable standard for recusal.”

Indeed, he wrote, he had an obligation to sit and hear the case.

What does the law at issue in the case actually say?

At its core, the case is about the meaning of a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. It was enacted after the collapse of Enron, a giant energy company, and the exposure of widespread accounting fraud and the destruction of documents by the company’s outside auditor.

There is an uneasy fit between the immediate purpose of the law and its recent use in hundreds of prosecutions arising from the violent riot that forced a halt to the constitutionally required congressional count of presidential electors’ ballots following the 2020 election.

At least part of what it meant to accomplish was to address a gap in the federal criminal code at the time: It was a crime to persuade others to destroy records relevant to an investigation or official proceeding but not to do so oneself.

The law meant to close that gap. It did, in a two-part provision, Section 1512(c) of the federal criminal code:

(c) Whoever corruptly — (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object , or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding , or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

The first part focuses on evidence, making it a felony to tamper with it to affect an official proceeding. The second part makes it a crime “otherwise” to corruptly obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding.

The heart of this case is the pivot from the first part to the second part. The ordinary meaning of “otherwise,” prosecutors say, is “in a different manner.” That means, they say, that the obstruction of official proceedings need not involve the destruction of evidence — in their view, making the second part a catchall for any kind of corrupt interference with an official proceeding.

The lawyers for Joseph W. Fischer, who was accused of breaching the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and of assaulting police officers, countered that the first part must inform and limit the second one — meaning that the obstruction of official proceedings must be linked to the destruction of evidence. They would read “otherwise” as “similarly.”

Glenn Thrush

Attorney General Merrick Garland says in a statement that he is “disappointed by today’s decision, which limits an important federal statute that the department has sought to use to ensure that those most responsible for that attack face appropriate consequences.”

Garland adds that “the vast majority of the more than 1,400 defendants charged for their illegal actions on January 6 will not be affected by this decision” but vows to “take appropriate steps to comply with the court’s ruling.”

Prosecutors believe that the ruling, while not welcome, will not have a major impact, and they have spent weeks gaming out how to deal with a range of actions they would have to take in response. The initial reaction among several Justice Department officials I’ve texted and emailed with is that it could have been worse.

Some federal judges in Washington who are handling the Jan. 6 cases have already signaled that they are willing to increase the sentences defendants receive on crimes other than the obstruction count in order to make up for any loss in prison time. Recall that the obstruction charge carries a hefty maximum penalty of 20 years.

Maggie Haberman

The political context of this ruling is already becoming apparent. While Trump is not likely to be directly impacted by it in his own federal indictment, it will affect hundreds of people arrested in connection with the attack on the Capitol. Trump, coming off the debate , is already posting on Truth Social about it victoriously.

Trump has been seeking to rewrite the history of Jan. 6 for years — calling it a lovefest, among other things — and has said he’d likely pardon some of those arrested. This will give him a new talking point.

Chris Cameron

Trump celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision in a short post on his social media site. He wrote “Big News!” and attached an image of another post that described the decision as “a massive victory for J6 political prisoners.”

Donald Trump has also been charged under the obstruction law in his federal election case in Washington. But it remains to be seen how the court’s ruling will affect him.

The court has said that the law can be applied only to cases that concern some sort of evidence impairment, like tampering with documents. Federal prosecutors have accused Trump of tampering with documents through his plot to create false slates of electors claiming he won in states that President Biden actually won.

The court’s ruling is likely to have more of an effect on the Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol than on Trump himself.

The biggest unknown in the wake of the ruling is the fate of the 52 people convicted exclusively under the law challenged in Fischer, with no other charge — 27 of whom are currently serving sentences in federal prison, according to the Justice Department.

Some basic statistics: nearly 1,430 people have been charged thus far in the attack on the Capitol. Of that number, 249, about 17 percent, were charged under the section of the law challenged in the case, according to Justice Department estimates. And about 100 have been convicted of the charge.

Nearly 1,430 people have been charged in the Jan. 6 attack.

The investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack is already the largest criminal inquiry in Justice Department history, federal prosecutors have said. And more than three years later, it has shown little sign of slowing down.

Every week, a few more rioters are arrested and charges against them are unsealed in Federal District Court in Washington. Prosecutors have suggested that perhaps 2,500 people could ultimately face indictment for their roles in the attack. And the number of arrests in each of the first five months of this year was higher than those in the first five months of both 2022 and 2023.

As of this month, nearly 1,430 people had been charged in connection with the attack, according to the Justice Department. Among the most common charges brought against them are two misdemeanors: illegal parading inside the Capitol and entering and remaining in a restricted federal area, a type of trespassing.

About 350 rioters have been accused of violating the obstruction statute at issue in the Supreme Court ruling, and more than 500 people have been charged with assaulting police officers. Many rioters have been charged with multiple crimes, the most serious of which so far has been seditious conspiracy.

More than 1,000 defendants have already pleaded guilty; about 260 of them have done so to felony charges. Prosecutors have won the vast majority of the cases that have gone to trial: About 170 defendants have been convicted at trial and only two have been fully acquitted.

Nearly 900 people have been sentenced so far, and more than 540 have received at least some time in prison. The stiffest penalties have been handed down to the former leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, far-right extremist groups that played central roles in the Capitol attack.

Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys leader, was sentenced to 22 years in prison , and Stewart Rhodes, who once led the Oath Keepers, was given an 18-year term .

The main practical effect of the court’s decision, lawyers who try these cases say, is that the Justice Department will face the task of having to resentence more than 100 people who have already been punished under the now-invalid interpretation of the obstruction law.

The bottom line in the Supreme Court’s decision about the federal obstruction law that sits at the heart of hundreds of prosecutions connected to the Jan. 6 attack is this: The justices rejected the idea that a statute initially intended to criminalize things like destroying documents or tampering with evidence in corporate malfeasance cases could be stretched by the Justice Department to include the disruptions of the democratic process that took place when rioters stormed the Capitol.

Before the ruling, prosecutors and some judges adjusted their approach to the charge in Jan. 6 cases.

When the justices announced in December that they planned to consider the soundness of an obstruction law that has been widely used against those who took part in the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, many legal experts expressed concern that their ruling could deliver a devastating blow to the Justice Department’s efforts to hold hundreds of rioters accountable.

Federal prosecutors have often used the obstruction count in lieu of more politically fraught charges like seditious conspiracy to punish the central event of Jan. 6: the disruption of a proceeding at the Capitol to certify the election.

But even before the court heard arguments in April, judges and prosecutors working on Capitol riot cases quietly started to adjust. For one thing, there are currently no defendants facing only the obstruction charge, according to the Justice Department. And ahead of the ruling, some judges signaled they would increase the sentences stemming from other charges if the obstruction count — which carries a hefty maximum penalty of 20 years in prison — was not available to them.

In February, for example, Judge Royce C. Lamberth denied an early release to an Iowa man, Leo Kelly, who was sentenced to 30 months in prison on the obstruction count and six other misdemeanors.

Judge Lamberth’s reason for not setting Mr. Kelly free?

Even if the Supreme Court ruled he was not permitted to sentence Mr. Kelly for obstruction, Judge Lamberth said he could increase the defendant’s total time in prison by imposing consecutive, not concurrent, terms on the misdemeanor charges.

Here’s the latest on the decision.

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that prosecutors had overstepped in using an obstruction law to charge a member of the mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, read the law narrowly, saying it applied only when the defendant’s actions impaired the integrity of physical evidence. Lower courts will now apply that strict standard, and it will presumably lead them to dismiss charges against many defendants. The most prominent defendant charged using the law in question is former President Donald J. Trump, as part of the federal case accusing him of plotting to subvert the 2020 election.

Here’s what to know:

Constraining prosecutors: The decision removes an important tool from prosecutors going after those who stormed the Capitol. Some 1,430 people have been charged in Jan. 6 cases, and of those, about 350 of the defendants faced this obstruction charge. Prosecutors had reserved it for the most serious cases in their effort to hold accountable people who they believed disrupted the peaceful transfer of presidential power.

Standing their ground: Rejecting calls for their disqualification, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. participated in the case and sided with the defendant, Joseph W. Fischer. Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices’ wives raised serious questions about their impartiality.

The charge itself: At issue was part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which was enacted after the collapse of the energy giant Enron and contains a broad catchall provision that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding. Mr. Fischer faced six other charges. Read more about what the law says .

The Trump connection: Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing the federal election interference case against the former president, has said Mr. Trump’s conduct could be considered a crime under even a narrow reading of the law. The former president is accused of tampering with documents through his plot to create false slates of electors claiming he won in states actually carried by President Biden. He also faces two other 2020 election charges unrelated to the law.

The case involves a former police officer: Mr. Fischer sent text messages to his then-boss, the police chief of North Cornwall Township, Pa., about his plans for Jan. 6, according to the government. In one message, he wrote that “they should storm the capital and drag all the democrates into the street and have a mob trial.” Mr. Fischer’s lawyers have said that he attended the rally on the Ellipse but was not part of the initial assault. “When the crowd breached the Capitol, Mr. Fischer was in Maryland, not Washington, D.C.,” his lawyers wrote in their brief. “He returned after Congress had recessed.”

The Supreme Court says prosecutors overstepped with a Jan. 6 charge.

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that federal prosecutors had improperly used an obstruction law to prosecute some members of the pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

The ruling could affect the prosecutions of hundreds of rioters out of the more than 1,400 who have been charged with an array of offenses for taking part in the effort to block certification of the 2020 election results.

It could also have an effect on part of the federal case against former President Donald J. Trump accusing him of plotting to overturn his 2020 loss at the polls. But the precise impact on those cases will not become clear until trial courts review them in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Prosecutors had argued that the law applied to efforts to obstruct an “official proceeding” — the joint session of Congress that took place on Jan. 6, 2021, to certify the Electoral College results.

But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, read the law narrowly, saying it applied only when the defendant’s actions impaired the integrity of physical evidence.

Lower courts will now apply that strict standard, and it may lead them to dismiss charges against some defendants, although most of those charged or convicted under the obstruction law also face other charges.

The vote was 6 to 3, but it featured unusual alliances. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a liberal, voted with the majority and filed a concurring opinion. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, wrote the dissent.

None of the opinions in the case discussed the charges against Mr. Trump, which rely only in part on the obstruction law.

Justice Jackson said the Jan. 6 attack was an assault on democracy. But that was not, she wrote, the question before the court.

“On Jan. 6, 2021, an angry mob stormed the United States Capitol seeking to prevent Congress from fulfilling its constitutional duty to certify the electoral votes in the 2020 presidential election,” she wrote. “The peaceful transfer of power is a fundamental democratic norm, and those who attempted to disrupt it in this way inflicted a deep wound on this nation.”

“But today’s case is not about the immorality of those acts,” she wrote. “Instead, the question before this court is far narrower: What is the scope of the particular crime Congress has outlined?”

A broad reading of the law, Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “would criminalize a broad swath of prosaic conduct, exposing activists and lobbyists alike to decades in prison.”

Federal prosecutors have downplayed the significance of the obstruction charge, saying it was an important but not essential part of their overall strategy to prosecute the 1,427 people charged thus far in the attack on the Capitol. Of that number, 350 were charged under the section of the law challenged in the case, according to the Justice Department.

The biggest unknown is the fate of the 52 people who have been convicted exclusively under the law, with no other charge — 27 of whom are currently serving sentences in federal prison.

It is almost certain that those behind bars will immediately petition the court for their release. But investigators in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington have continued to accumulate a vast trove of evidence, much of it in the form of new electronic communications from people who have already stood trial.

That additional evidence might implicate some of the Jan. 6 defendants on other charges, which could lead to new trials, according to law enforcement officials.

The defendant in the case before the justices, Joseph W. Fischer, for instance, faced six other charges.

Justice Jackson stressed that reading the law narrowly did not necessarily mean that Mr. Fischer would prevail.

“It might well be that Fischer’s conduct, as alleged here, involved the impairment (or the attempted impairment) of the availability or integrity of things used during the Jan. 6 proceeding,” she wrote. That question, she wrote, is for lower courts to decide.

The effect of the ruling in Mr. Fischer’s favor on Mr. Trump’s case could also be limited. Jack Smith, the special counsel who brought the federal election interference charges against the former president, has said Mr. Trump’s conduct could be considered a crime under even a narrow reading of the obstruction law. Mr. Smith used the law in connection with Mr. Trump’s effort to create slates of electors pledged to vote for him from states won by President Biden.

A brief passage in the majority opinion may lend support to that view. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that it is possible to violate the obstruction law “by creating false evidence — rather than altering incriminating evidence.”

That statement might well encompass Mr. Trump’s efforts to create slates of fake electors.

In any event, the former president faces two other charges unrelated to the law, part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

In a separate case, the justices appear poised to rule on Monday on whether Mr. Trump is immune from prosecution for actions he took as president. The court’s ruling could render moot questions about whether the 2002 law covers his conduct.

The Supreme Court has said that the purpose of the obstruction law, prompted by accounting fraud and the destruction of documents, was “to safeguard investors in public companies and restore trust in the financial markets following the collapse of Enron Corporation.”

The question for the justices in the case, Fischer v. United States, No. 23-5572, was whether the law could be used to prosecute Mr. Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer .

According to the government, Mr. Fischer sent text messages to his boss, the police chief of North Cornwall Township, Pa., about his plans for Jan. 6. “It might get violent,” he said in one. In another, he wrote that “they should storm the capital and drag all the democrates into the street and have a mob trial.”

Prosecutors say that videos showed Mr. Fischer yelling “Charge!” before pushing through the crowd and entering the Capitol around 3:24 p.m. on Jan. 6. He used a vulgar term to berate police officers, prosecutors said, and crashed into a line of them. He was, the government’s brief said, “forcibly removed about four minutes after entering.”

Mr. Fischer’s lawyers, by contrast, stressed that he had attended the rally on the Ellipse but was not part of the initial assault.

“When the crowd breached the Capitol, Mr. Fischer was in Maryland, not Washington, D.C.,” his lawyers wrote in their brief. “He returned after Congress had recessed.”

“His earlier Facebook posts about violence, when read in context, refer to his belief that antifa planned to disrupt the rally,” they continued. He had yelled “Charge!” in “obvious jest,” they added.

In disrupting the certification of Mr. Biden’s electoral victory, prosecutors said, Mr. Fischer had obstructed an official proceeding in violation of the 2002 law, which was principally concerned with the destruction of evidence.

At least part of what the law meant to accomplish was to address a gap in the federal criminal code: It had been a crime to persuade others to destroy records relevant to an investigation or official proceeding but not to do so oneself. The law sought to close that gap through a two-part provision. The first part made it a crime to corruptly alter, destroy or conceal evidence to frustrate official proceedings. The second part, at issue in Mr. Fischer’s case, makes it a crime “otherwise” to corruptly obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding.

The heart of the case is at the pivot from the first part to the second. The ordinary meaning of “otherwise,” prosecutors said, is “in a different manner.” That means, they said, that the obstruction of official proceedings need not involve the destruction of evidence. The second part, they say, is a broad catchall.

Mr. Fischer’s lawyers countered that the first part must inform and limit the second one — meaning that the obstruction of official proceedings must be linked to the destruction of evidence. They would read “otherwise” as “similarly.”

Justice Jackson largely agreed. “There is no indication whatsoever that Congress intended to create a sweeping, all-purpose obstruction statute,” she wrote.

In dissent, Justice Barrett, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, wrote that “Congress meant what it said.”

Glenn Thrush contributed reporting.