And to emergency and cellular lines but not to residential lines. Under wellestablished rules of statutory construction the entire phrase to be called sequential Number Generator that has a statue of impossible between the definition and the targeted mission under ordinary rules of grammar that modifier not just a second and so those of the disparate impact reinforces that conclusion first it is set off by that, modified by the verb and second a direct object the direct object of those telephone numbers to be called in those were significant judicial that. And then to the Residential Land line. From those in 1991. And with those multiple business lines that were in with those and if they were really aiming at those calls from devices the failure to protect the hope would be inexplicable. Mr. Clement your friend on the other side says we should look at the passage and not to the rules of syntax. I know you were dispute about the passage but as a general matter he is right . The drafters
And to emergency and cellular lines but not to residential lines. Under wellestablished rules of statutory construction the entire phrase to be called sequential Number Generator that has a statue of impossible between the definition and the targeted mission under ordinary rules of grammar that modifier not just a second and so those of the disparate impact reinforces that conclusion first it is set off by that, modified by the verb and second a direct object the direct object of those telephone numbers to be called in those were significant judicial that. And then to the Residential Land line. From those in 1991. And with those multiple business lines that were in with those and if they were really aiming at those calls from devices the failure to protect the hope would be inexplicable. Mr. Clement your friend on the other side says we should look at the passage and not to the rules of syntax. I know you were dispute about the passage but as a general matter he is right . The drafters
Good morning. Welcome. Please be seated. We will begin by hearing argument in the two cases that are on that we will hear simultaneously, state of new york et al. Versus United States department of justice and make the road new york versus kuchali. May it please the cord, jerry sinzdak appearing on behalf of the United States. Good morning. Good morning. The District Courts injunctions are flawed in several respects and should be set aside. As a threshold matter plaintiffs have failed to assert recognizable injury and they seek to promote an interest that is diametrically opposed to the purpose of the public charge statute. It therefore lacks standing. On the merits as the District Court found im sorry, as the ninth circuit found the rule easily is a reasonable interpretation of the public charge provision. Congress made clear in 1996 that it sought to ensure that aliens admitted to the country do not rely on Public Benefits but didnt it do that by making them ineligible for the most p
Test captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2008 i did want to make that distinction, thats one point. Yes. And making a second point you think at least that in the context of the whole sweep of history, et cetera, Congress Decision not to do this lends some further support to the idea of application of the settled interpretation. Thats absolutely right. Not to draw those infrensz. I will further add to that, at that 96 point, there was also congress was making these choices at a time when there was over 100 years of established meaning and it was aware of that meaning, we know that from the 1952 legislative history and there was so much law on this, including the 99 guidance or not the 99 guidance, but including the a. G. Decisions that congress was adopting the established meaning of public charge, yet again, while making these other affirmative choices about what to do. The next thing is, the 1999 guidance comes out and for two administrations of two parties nobody says,
Test captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2008 i did want to make that distinction, thats one point. Yes. And making a second point you think at least that in the context of the whole sweep of history, et cetera, Congress Decision not to do this lends some further support to the idea of application of the settled interpretation. Thats absolutely right. Not to draw those infrensz. I will further add to that, at that 96 point, there was also congress was making these choices at a time when there was over 100 years of established meaning and it was aware of that meaning, we know that from the 1952 legislative history and there was so much law on this, including the 99 guidance or not the 99 guidance, but including the a. G. Decisions that congress was adopting the established meaning of public charge, yet again, while making these other affirmative choices about what to do. The next thing is, the 1999 guidance comes out and for two administrations of two parties nobody says,