Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Johnson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), 911 F.2d 1302 (1990)

Citation
Johnson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), 911 F.2d 1302 (1990)
Parent Document
Johnson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), 911 F.2d 1302 (1990)
Effective Date
1990-10-29

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text

770 chars
35
Hillvale argues that the Reform Act, even if clarifying, is not entitled to the weight normally given subsequent legislation because it was enacted in an expedited manner and sidestepped the committee process. We disagree. Although the Reform Act was passed on an expedited basis, it nevertheless proceeded "formally through the legislative process." Id. Furthermore, several members of the House and Senate specifically mentioned the clarifying amendment to the Preservation Act during the floor debate and therefore it cannot be said that the full Congress was unaware of its implications. 135 Cong.Rec. H8605 (daily ed. Nov. 14, 1989) (remarks by Rep. Gonzalez); id. S16,593 (daily ed. Nov. 21, 1989) (remarks by Sen. Cranston); id. S16,611 (remarks by Sen. Bond).