Let me stop the gentleman in the middle of his sentence, because that is a big ``if,'' if there are no further constitutional grounds. The ones that I am talking about are where there is a constitutional ground. And what this amendment does is say you cannot have a remedy where there is a constitutional basis for the order. So to just kind of gloss over that big ``if'' in the gentleman's sentence is a serious matter.
Discussing constitutional grounds related to an amendment during a House debate.
Share
More from Melvin Watt
I am wondering, if you think this is redundant and extraneous rather than contrary to the intent, why wouldn't we just accept the amendment and keep going?
I simply wanted to rise and pay tribute to the memory of my dear friend and colleague, Major Owens, who passed last week. I express my condolences to his family. As new Members, we take for granted sometimes that there is a system in place…
This is in line with my consistently repeated belief that it is the role of Congress, not FHFA, to decide on housing finance reform.
Due process cannot be dispensed in 5-minute exchanges of questions and answers, or by politicians...
Other voices in this conversation
