5
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the 1986 amendment to conduct complet
.. effect upon ... current law" so that Congress can make informed judgments about the impact of proposed bills. See The Library of Congress, About CRS Summary, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/bsdabt dgetlitnil (last visited May 10, 2009). -6- EFTA00212898 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 29 Entered o
is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the 1986 amendment to conduct complet
.. effect upon ... current law" so that Congress can make informed judgments about the impact of proposed bills. See The Library of Congress, About CRS Summary, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/bsdabt dgetlitnil (last visited May 10, 2009). -6- EFTA00212965 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 29 Entered o
is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the 1986 amendment to conduct complet
.. effect upon ... current law" so that Congress can make informed judgments about the impact of proposed bills. See The Library of Congress, About CRS Summary, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/bsdabt dgetlitnil (last visited May 10, 2009). -6- EFTA00221368 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 29 Entered o
is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the 1986 amendment to conduct complet
.. effect upon ... current law" so that Congress can make informed judgments about the impact of proposed bills. See The Library of Congress, About CRS Summary, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/bsdabt dgetlitnil (last visited May 10, 2009). -6- EFTA00221465 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 29 Entered o
is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the 1986 amendment to conduct complet
.. effect upon ... current law" so that Congress can make informed judgments about the impact of proposed bills. See The Library of Congress, About CRS Summary, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/bsdabt dgetlitnil (last visited May 10, 2009). -6- EFTA00189754 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 29 Entered o
Entities connected to both Schumer and CRS Summary

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSONLeon Black
PERSON
Prince Andrew
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
George W. Bush
PERSON
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION
Alfredo Rodriguez
PERSON
Oliver Stone
PERSON
United States District Court
ORGANIZATION
Alan Dershowitz
PERSON
Jennifer Lopez
PERSON
John Kerry
PERSON
Chuck Grassley
PERSONJack Goldberger
PERSON
H.R.
PERSONEllis
PERSONthe Senate Judiciary Committee
ORGANIZATIONEvans
PERSONHansen
PERSON