DOJ-OGR-00005187.jpg
790 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / handwritten legal argument
File Size:
790 KB
Summary
This handwritten legal document argues that Congress intentionally excluded specific child abuse definitions found in § 3509(a) when making technical corrections in 1994, suggesting these definitions apply to civil reporting rather than criminal statutes. The text cites legal precedents such as *Ibarra v. Holder*, *Jama v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement*, and *Brown v. Gardner* to support principles of statutory interpretation regarding congressional intent and context.
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Congress | ||
| Immigration & Customs Enforcement | ||
| DOJ | ||
| 10th Cir. |
Timeline (2 events)
1994 technical correction / conforming repeal
Filed 10/12/21
Relationships (3)
→
→
→
→
to
→
→
Key Quotes (3)
""Courts do not lightly assume that Congress has omitted from its adopted text requirements that it nonetheless intends to apply""Source
DOJ-OGR-00005187.jpg
Quote #1
""Proper statutory construction requires considering a phrases placement and Purpose in the Statutory Scheme .... The meaning of statutory language plain or not depends on context.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00005187.jpg
Quote #2
"Civil and Criminal definitions frequently differ"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005187.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document