X hits on this document

694 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

44 / 130

WT/DS162/R/Add.1 Page 41

3.11

The United States further points out that when the 1916 Act was later codified in the United States Code, it was placed under title 15, entitled "Commerce and Trade."  Also located in title 15 are the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act, which are all antitrust laws.  In contrast, antidumping laws are codified in title 19.137

3.12

The United States considers that Japan's description of the 1916 Act's legislative history is incomplete and misleading.  Japan chooses to rely upon isolated fragments of Congressional and even private industry testimony that go against the clear weight of the record.  Some of Japan's historical references date from years after the Act was passed, amounting to post hoc commentary, not the actual legislative history of the Act.

137 In response to a question of Japan regarding the significance of the placement of a statute under a certain title in the US Code system and whether the codification actually reflects the legislative intent, the United States notes that, ordinarily, when a bill has passed the US Congress and been enacted into law, the law itself does not provide under which title of the US Code it should be placed.  The task of placing the new law in the proper title falls to the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, which was created pursuant to section 285 of title 2 of the US Code (2 U.S.C. § 285).  The person who heads this office, known as the Law Revision Counsel, is appointed by the Speaker of the US House of Representatives on a nonpartisan basis (See 2 U.S.C. § 285c, where it is stated that "[…] the Law Revision Counsel […] shall be appointed by the Speaker without regard to political affiliation and solely on the basis of fitness to perform the duties of the position."; 2 U.S.C. 285a, where it is stated that the Office of Law Revision Counsel "shall maintain impartiality as to issues of legislative policy to be determined by the House.").  The duties of the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, which are overseen by  the Committee on the Judiciary of the US House of Representatives, are set out in section 285.  These duties include the preparation of "a complete compilation, restatement, and revision of the general and permanent laws of the United States which conforms to the understood policy, intent and purpose of the Congress in the original enactments […] with a view to the enactment of each title as positive law," and "[t]o prepare and submit periodically such revisions in the titles of the code which have been enacted into positive law as may be necessary to keep such titles current." (2 U.S.C. § 285b)  In addition, the Office of the Law Revision Counsel is "[t]o classify newly enacted provisions of law to their proper positions in the code where the titles involved have not yet been enacted into positive law." (ibid.)  By way of background, the distinction between whether a particular title of the US Code is or is not "positive law" largely has relevance only for technical legislative drafting purposes and to establish, as a matter of legal evidence, the exact wording of a statute.  A title of the US Code is the "positive law" when the title itself has been enacted into law.  A title of the US Code is not the "positive law" when it is a collection of certain general and permanent laws of the United States placed there by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, acting under the supervision of the House Judiciary Committee.  In that event, the "positive law" is each of the general and permanent laws of the United States that have been placed in the title.  For example, both title 15 and title 19 currently are not "positive law."  This means simply that, for example, with regard to the 1916 Act, sections 7174 of title 15 of the US Code are not "positive law"; rather, the "positive law" is sections 80104 of the Revenue Act of 1916.  Similarly, with regard to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the United States' current antidumping law, sections 1671 et seq. of title 19 of the US Code are not the "positive law"; rather, the "positive law" is sections 701 et seq. of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.  Currently, the Office of the Law Revision Counsel is engaged in a continuing, comprehensive project authorized by law to revise and codify, for enactment into "positive law," each title of the US Code.  So far, twentytwo of fifty titles of the US Code have been converted into "positive law."  The United States notes that, for purposes of the present dispute, the US Code itself first came into existence in 1926, ten years after the enactment of the 1916 Act and well before the creation of the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.  Up until that point, the laws of the United States had simply been set forth in a compilation known as the Statutes at Large, which was organized by the chronological order of enactment.  The creation of the US Code in 1926 was undertaken by the House Committee on the Revision of the Laws, with assistance from a Senate Select Committee.  It was then that the laws of the United States were first assembled and classified.  The United States also notes that the House Judiciary Committee more recently, in 1994, issued a "Compilation of Selected Antitrust Laws," which expressly lists the 1916 Act as one of the principal antitrust laws.  The House Judiciary Committee is the same committee that oversees the work of the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.

Document info
Document views694
Page views694
Page last viewedSun Jan 22 21:21:38 UTC 2017
Pages130
Paragraphs2054
Words82375

Comments