Definition
In legal usage, "popular" carries two distinct senses, each appearing in specific doctrinal contexts:
1. Pertaining to the people generally, as distinguished from a select class or individual. A law, action, or right described as "popular" is one that belongs to or is exercisable by the public at large rather than a named or specially aggrieved party.
2. In statutory construction, the "popular sense" or "popular meaning" of a word refers to the meaning understood by ordinary persons familiar with the subject matter — as distinguished from a strictly technical or scientific meaning. Courts applying this interpretive principle ask how a term would be understood by those conversant with the context in which it appears, not necessarily by lawyers or specialists.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Liked by many people; generally accepted or widely admired; aimed at ordinary people rather than specialists.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Of or pertaining to the common people, or to the whole body of the people, as distinguished from a select portion; suitable to common people; not abstruse; familiar; plain.
The common meanings are not far removed from the legal ones, but the gap matters in research. In ordinary modern usage, "popular" most often means widely liked or admired — a cultural sense with no legal weight. In legal sources, "popular" retains the older, more precise sense of belonging to or accessible by the people generally, without any implication of approval or preference. A "popular action" is not a favored or celebrated lawsuit; it is one that any member of the public may bring.
---
Common Confusion
POPULAR SENSE vs. ORDINARY MEANING vs. TECHNICAL MEANING: These three interpretive standards are related but distinct. "Ordinary meaning" looks to how an average reader understands a word in everyday language. "Popular sense" as used in Anderson and older authorities looks to how persons familiar with the relevant subject matter — not necessarily experts — understand the term. "Technical meaning" looks to how a term of art is defined within a specialized discipline. The popular sense standard occupies a middle ground and is easily conflated with either of the other two. Researchers working in statutory interpretation must distinguish which standard a court is applying.
POPULAR ACTION vs. PRIVATE ACTION vs. PUBLIC ACTION: A popular action is brought by a private individual, but on behalf of the public, typically to recover a penalty created by statute. It is neither a purely private action (which vindicates personal rights) nor a government enforcement action. This tripartite confusion is addressed further under RELATED TERMS.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The word "popular" in older legal sources is a technical flag, not a descriptive adjective. When encountered in a case, treatise, or statute from the nineteenth century or earlier, it signals one of two specific doctrines: either the law of popular (qui tam or penalty) actions, or the interpretive rule about popular meaning in statutory construction. Missing this distinction can cause a researcher to misread the significance of the term entirely.
Popular actions have a complex history in American law. Early English and colonial statutes frequently created penalties recoverable by "any person who shall sue," generating a class of litigation that blurred the line between public enforcement and private entrepreneurship. The rise of regulatory agencies and qui tam statutes (including the modern False Claims Act) inherits this tradition, but the vocabulary shifted — "popular action" largely disappeared from American legal usage by the early twentieth century while the underlying concept survived in different terminology. Researchers tracing the history of qui tam enforcement or whistleblower statutes will find "popular action" as the governing term in pre-twentieth-century sources and must recognize it as the ancestor.
In statutory construction, the popular sense rule appears frequently in nineteenth- and early twentieth-century opinions and treatises. It is not identical to the modern plain meaning rule, and researchers should be careful not to read one back into the other. The popular sense standard carries an implicit community-of-knowledge element — it asks about the understanding of persons acquainted with the subject — which makes it slightly more contextual than a bare appeal to dictionary definitions.
Corpus researchers should note that "popular" as a legal modifier will be underrepresented in modern databases relative to its historical frequency. Full-text searches will return large numbers of irrelevant hits (modern "popular" in the cultural sense) and may miss the doctrinal usage in older materials that use the term as a term of art without explanation.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Anderson's Dictionary of Law provides the core architecture still useful to researchers: popular as an adjective modifying action (any-person suits for statutory penalties) and popular as a modifier of sense in statutory construction (meaning as understood by persons conversant with the subject matter). Anderson's cross-reference to ACTION is important — the entry there would have elaborated the procedural framework for popular actions.
Anderson does not address the decline of popular action terminology or its relationship to qui tam procedure, nor does it engage with the tension between the popular sense rule and emerging positivist approaches to statutory interpretation that were developing at the time of the dictionary's compilation. The statutory construction entry is thin — the citation to "8" (likely a volume reference) without further elaboration leaves the standard undercontextualized.
Webster's 1913 captures the underlying conceptual architecture well: the contrast between the people generally and a select portion is exactly the distinction doing legal work in "popular action." The Webster's formulation — "suitable to common people; easy to be comprehended; not abstruse" — maps cleanly onto the popular sense doctrine in statutory construction.
No significant divergence exists between Anderson and Webster's on the core meaning. The gap is one of application, not definition: the dictionaries agree on what "popular" means but legal usage channels it into specific doctrinal uses that lay usage does not track.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Popular actions existed in both English and American law but their procedural rules and availability varied considerably by jurisdiction and by the specific enabling statute. Some American states abolished popular actions by statute or constitutional provision during the nineteenth century. Researchers should not assume uniform availability across jurisdictions or time periods. The modern False Claims Act's qui tam provisions are a federal statutory creature and should not be analyzed through the lens of historical popular action doctrine without care.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Law Mind Encyclopedia — Popular Action
Law Mind Encyclopedia — Statutory Interpretation (Popular and Ordinary Meaning)
Law Mind Encyclopedia — Qui Tam
---