The question has arisen as to the language ``failure to comply'' and how that might relate to some other section. I share the concern of the Senator from Louisiana and bemusement really as to why our friends refuse to read the rest of that sentence. Instead of reading the rest of the sentence in which that phrase is contained, other sections are referred to. Is it not true that it is ``failure to comply with this subsection may be considered by the Court solely for the purpose of determining whether or not the final agency action is arbitrary and capricious,'' et cetera?
Mike Thompson: “The question has arisen as to the language ``failure to comply'' and how that might relate to some other section. I…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of legal language in a legislative context.
Share
More from Mike Thompson
Californians are all too familiar with the devastation caused by wildfires. In the wake of losing their homes and livelihoods, it is wrong to tax survivors on settlement money that is meant to help them rebuild their lives.
15 million jobs have been created under President Biden; more Americans have health insurance than ever before; Democrats expanded Child Tax Credit, cut child poverty by over 40 percent and benefitted over 35 million families.
These families should not have their assets, which are necessary to do their jobs and feed our Nation counted against them.
It is wrong to tax survivors on settlement money that is meant to help them rebuild their lives.





