The document is an assignment detailing for a student to analyze and discuss issues related to electricity usage and power outages. It provides background information on generating electricity and its environmental impacts. It then presents two scenarios for the student to respond to - one where the power is out, and one where the power is on. For the power outage scenario, the student is asked to discuss inconveniences, concerns if the outage lasts 3+ days, and their preferred backup power source. For the power on scenario, the student must analyze behaviors to reduce heating/cooling costs, how switching to LEDs can save on lighting costs, and ways to reduce hot water usage.
Chapter Eleven Environmental and Energy Policy1‹#.docxchristinemaritza
Chapter Eleven: Environmental
and Energy Policy
1
‹#›
Introduction
What does environmental policy address and how has it evolved?
What are the major U.S. environmental policies? Have they been effective?
What natural resource policies are in place?
How does the U.S. use energy, and what is U.S. energy policy?
What is being done about climate change?
2
‹#›
What Does Environmental Policy Address? How Has It Evolved?
3
‹#›
Environmental Policy at a Crossroad
Narrow View
Humans’ relationship to nature
Human health and the environment
Policy implications
Protection through regulation
Modern, Broader View
Set of natural systems that interact in complex ways
Environment supplies humans (and other species) with necessities for life
Policy implications
Sustainable development
4
Environmental Policy: Overview
Definition: Government actions that affect environmental quality and the use of natural resources
Broad in scope, complicated, scientific
Three focus areas:
Pollution control/protection
Resource use and protection
Energy use and conservation
5
Environmental Policy (cont’d)
Many actors and interest groups
States have a very strong role: implement the federal policies
Regulatory solutions historically favored
command and control
Public opinion is a major player
6
Collaborative decision-making=industry and other interest groups work with government to make & implement policy
‹#›
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Independent executive agency
Reports to and follows lead of current administration
Largest federal agency
10 regional offices work closely with states
Logo Source: http://www.epa.gov/
‹#›
History of Environmental Policy:
From Consensus to Conflict
Early focus through 1960s: protect resources
1970s: control pollution
1980s-00s: Incremental reform
policy enhancement
Clinton’s collaborative decision making
Since 1980s- mostly conflict and gridlock
Now, from domestic concerns to global concerns
8
Notice These Themes:
Tension between business and environmental interests
Partisan disagreement
Perspectives on the “truth” of science vary
Shift from domestic to global issues
9
What Are the Major Federal
Environmental Policies?
10
Early Policies
1969: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
States not protecting the environment
Focused on the process of decision-making
Required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Assess environmental effects of proposed action
Public scrutiny, consultation with affected parties
Changed the way decisions made about development; still in use today
11
First major federal policy –
‹#›
How Does NEPA Work?
Video: (http://youtu.be/0DAWOui0UzU)
“NEPA Citizen’s Guide.” Letsbe7, September 24, 2008. Practical and informative video about what the National Environmental Policy Act requires and how it works. (Time: 7:05)
Video: http://youtu.be/0DAWOui0UzU. “NEPA Citizen’s Guide.” Letsbe7, September 24, 2008. Practical and informative video abou ...
An introduction to mediation and collaborative law for Stevens County Bar Association lawyers by Bruce Pruitt-Hamm, JD (Certified Mediator and Collaborative Practitioner)
Chapter Eleven Environmental and Energy Policy1‹#.docxchristinemaritza
Chapter Eleven: Environmental
and Energy Policy
1
‹#›
Introduction
What does environmental policy address and how has it evolved?
What are the major U.S. environmental policies? Have they been effective?
What natural resource policies are in place?
How does the U.S. use energy, and what is U.S. energy policy?
What is being done about climate change?
2
‹#›
What Does Environmental Policy Address? How Has It Evolved?
3
‹#›
Environmental Policy at a Crossroad
Narrow View
Humans’ relationship to nature
Human health and the environment
Policy implications
Protection through regulation
Modern, Broader View
Set of natural systems that interact in complex ways
Environment supplies humans (and other species) with necessities for life
Policy implications
Sustainable development
4
Environmental Policy: Overview
Definition: Government actions that affect environmental quality and the use of natural resources
Broad in scope, complicated, scientific
Three focus areas:
Pollution control/protection
Resource use and protection
Energy use and conservation
5
Environmental Policy (cont’d)
Many actors and interest groups
States have a very strong role: implement the federal policies
Regulatory solutions historically favored
command and control
Public opinion is a major player
6
Collaborative decision-making=industry and other interest groups work with government to make & implement policy
‹#›
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Independent executive agency
Reports to and follows lead of current administration
Largest federal agency
10 regional offices work closely with states
Logo Source: http://www.epa.gov/
‹#›
History of Environmental Policy:
From Consensus to Conflict
Early focus through 1960s: protect resources
1970s: control pollution
1980s-00s: Incremental reform
policy enhancement
Clinton’s collaborative decision making
Since 1980s- mostly conflict and gridlock
Now, from domestic concerns to global concerns
8
Notice These Themes:
Tension between business and environmental interests
Partisan disagreement
Perspectives on the “truth” of science vary
Shift from domestic to global issues
9
What Are the Major Federal
Environmental Policies?
10
Early Policies
1969: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
States not protecting the environment
Focused on the process of decision-making
Required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Assess environmental effects of proposed action
Public scrutiny, consultation with affected parties
Changed the way decisions made about development; still in use today
11
First major federal policy –
‹#›
How Does NEPA Work?
Video: (http://youtu.be/0DAWOui0UzU)
“NEPA Citizen’s Guide.” Letsbe7, September 24, 2008. Practical and informative video about what the National Environmental Policy Act requires and how it works. (Time: 7:05)
Video: http://youtu.be/0DAWOui0UzU. “NEPA Citizen’s Guide.” Letsbe7, September 24, 2008. Practical and informative video abou ...
An introduction to mediation and collaborative law for Stevens County Bar Association lawyers by Bruce Pruitt-Hamm, JD (Certified Mediator and Collaborative Practitioner)
Erin Deady
This session will continue the discussion of the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact in SE Florida. Understanding and preparing for climate change on a local level is among the most significant and timely sustainability issues facing Florida and its vulnerability to those impacts. The issues cross the social, built, and natural environments and the jurisdictional lines of local government. The session will further explore national and state policy and funding issues, as well as legal and organizational aspects of addressing climate change impacts.
Running Head COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT1COMMITMENT.docxsusanschei
Running Head: COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT 1
COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT 4
COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT
Danielle Schummer
G328/EVR3410 Human Uses of the Environment
According to my thinking, the United States of America should commit itself to the Paris agreement. It will enable the country to contribute the maximum to environmental conservation. The country should make efforts in committing itself to the Paris agreement as it has brought nations from the entire world into a common cause. Thus undertaking the needed ambitions for combating the climatic change and accordingly adapting the possible effects and challenges experienced by each country and coming up with solutions to help the developing countries to withstand the problems encountered.
The agreement will, therefore, chart a new course in the global climate efforts which will help in safeguarding the welfare of the people's health (Maslin, 2007). The United States of America should, again, commit itself to the agreement as its made to strengthen the global responses to the threats brought by adverse climatic changes by developing favorable global temperature rise in the century, for the world to experience a 2 degrees Celsius decrease in the industrialized areas. According to the Paris agreement, the countries, as a whole, should develop different efforts to ensure that the nations experience a 2 degrees Celsius temperature drop. The deal is significant in that it will strengthen countries’ abilities to deal with the results brought by climatic changes as it is realized that it is changing in every century.
The United States committing itself to the deal will again enable it to oversee more developments in the country as a specific financial flow should be witnessed, new technologies developed, and an enhanced capacity building framework brought into existence which will support the actions of the nation by promoting them invulnerable and reliable nations, thus meeting their set objectives (NSTC, 2008). The Paris deal has again provided enough transparency of the efforts by each state and developed a very clear framework for the nations to fight the effects of climate change within a set period.
According to my understanding, we can experience global warming as a result of continued air pollution and increased industrialization by many countries in the world. As the days go by, many industries are constructed and a mechanism is not put in place to protect the polluted air from entering the atmosphere. On the other hand, the Paris agreement has impacted my stand on global warming as it has enabled me to realize that different countries can come together thus developing mechanisms objectively to reduce the occurrence of global warming.
As a result of global warming water resources have been affected, leading to a decline in irrigation supplies. This occurs due to the loss of the mountain snowpack hence reducing the amounts of water for the ir ...
Court: the last resort. You opposed Alberta Environment’s decision to approve or refuse a regulated activity. Maybe there was no environmental impact assessment. Maybe an appeal to the Environmental Appeals Board was unsuccessful.
On February 25th, Adam Driedzic, Staff Counsel with the Environmental Law Centre, discussed judicial review of administrative decision-making. He covered key questions for potential litigants, including:
* How is reviewing procedural fairness different from appealing the result?
* What remedies can the court award, and what are the risks?
* Who may have standing in the courts, and when should they start proceedings?
A Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania decision against the oil and gas industry in a case that sought to bar the state Dept. of Environmental Protection from considering nebulous impacts on the public and natural resources when considering whether or not to grant a drilling permit.
EQT Notice of Appeal Contesting DEP Order Finding Greene County Spill Led to ...Marcellus Drilling News
The appeal from EQT in response to a finding/order by the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) in which the DEP alleges a 2010 spill at an EQT drilling site in Greene County, PA led to permanent pollution of a nearby fresh water spring.
1
EMTALA & PATIENT- CENTEREDNESS
Week 9 Assignment
Faridah Mohammad
HA330-44
06/22/2019
1
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:40:10-07:00
This needs to be including at the top left of every page of this paper
2
1. What was the reasoning for enacting the Emergency Medical Treatment and
Active Labour Act?
EMTALA is a form of activism that has been implemented to perform different functions in
the healthcare section. Major reasoning for engaging the EMTALA includes the stabilization
of critical patients in emergent situations before being taken to any medical center as needed.
This is done through proper evaluation of the condition and determining the best way of
responding to a critical state of affairs of the patient. Key other reasons will include the
aspect of preventing more damage and impairment of one's health and also gives room to
determine the best receiving hospital with the necessary facilities, skills, and medical
capabilities. Also in addition to that, there is a chance to record every step of the patient's
state of health (Jeremy &Julia, 2016).
2. Should medical advice be dispensed on the Telephone? Explain your opinion.
In this case, medical advice can be dispensed over the phone depending on what the situation
entails. If it's on general medical situations, then it's ok as this has few of its benefits.
Through the telephone, one can have excellent advice as in most cases, skilled medical
expertise is the ones allowed to give the advice hence dependable information is provided.
Also, its time saving as there are cases where the patient has doubts and instead of meeting up
with doctors can consult through the phone. In the case of the emergent situations, life could
be saved through first aid performance before urgent help is availed. Such medical advice
involves privacy between the client and doctor and it's cost-effective. However, it's key to
have a disclaimer of the medical situation to maintain strictly a doctor-patient relationship
(Ellen, 2014).
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:41:29-07:00
Which case are you referring to here?
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:42:12-07:00
Not sure what you are trying to say here
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:43:20-07:00
Do you mean "experts"? Proofread
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:44:56-07:00
I really have no idea what point you are trying to make here.
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:55:48-07:00
It is not a form of activism, it is a Federal Law!
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:56:32-07:00
This is the wrong word to use in this sentence.
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:58:06-07:00
This response does not really address the question. It does not really explain why it was passed,which is the question.
3
3. Why prescribing, control, administration, and monitoring of medication is a
major area of legal concern for healthcare professionals?
Legal concerns analyze the legitimacy of conducting cert.
Assignment DetailsScenario You are member of a prisoner revie.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Scenario:
You are member of a prisoner review board for a minimum-security facility in your state. Included among the inmates are a number of heroin addicts who were charged with possession crimes and some minor thefts through which they supported their habits.
Please include answers in your main post for the following questions:
What are the methods of treatment for heroin addiction?
What is the difference between heroin detoxification and heroin addiction treatment?
What is the best method for ensuring the heroin addict does not return to heroin abuse? Does long-term incarceration play a role?
.
Assignment DetailsScenario You are an investigator for Child .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Scenario:
You are an investigator for Child Protective Services in your community. One of the most difficult aspects of interviewing is the interview of a suspected victim of child sexual abuse. Often, the first interviewers are detectives or investigators from the police department with little or no training for interviewing child sexual abuse victims. The Commander of the Sex Crimes Unit would like to you to identify errors in interviewing by police investigators when questioning child sex crime victims about the circumstances during the alleged offense(s). The psychopathology of the suspect and the victim are very important, but the victim can be misled unintentionally by police resulting in false or inaccurate complaint information.
The Commander of the Sex Crimes Unit would like you to outline and explain the specific areas to be avoided when questioning a child as a sex crime victim.
Specifically, he is concerned with the following:
The use of suggestive questions
The implication of confirmation by other people
Use of positive and negative consequences
Repetitious questioning
Inviting speculation
In a 3–5-page paper, address the specific concerns, and explain why it is preferable to have the child interviewed by a person with the qualifications to potentially testify as an expert witness in subsequent criminal trials
.
More Related Content
Similar to Assignment DetailsPower’s on, Power’s Off!How convenient is.docx
Erin Deady
This session will continue the discussion of the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact in SE Florida. Understanding and preparing for climate change on a local level is among the most significant and timely sustainability issues facing Florida and its vulnerability to those impacts. The issues cross the social, built, and natural environments and the jurisdictional lines of local government. The session will further explore national and state policy and funding issues, as well as legal and organizational aspects of addressing climate change impacts.
Running Head COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT1COMMITMENT.docxsusanschei
Running Head: COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT 1
COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT 4
COMMITMENT OF USA TO PARIS AGREEMENT
Danielle Schummer
G328/EVR3410 Human Uses of the Environment
According to my thinking, the United States of America should commit itself to the Paris agreement. It will enable the country to contribute the maximum to environmental conservation. The country should make efforts in committing itself to the Paris agreement as it has brought nations from the entire world into a common cause. Thus undertaking the needed ambitions for combating the climatic change and accordingly adapting the possible effects and challenges experienced by each country and coming up with solutions to help the developing countries to withstand the problems encountered.
The agreement will, therefore, chart a new course in the global climate efforts which will help in safeguarding the welfare of the people's health (Maslin, 2007). The United States of America should, again, commit itself to the agreement as its made to strengthen the global responses to the threats brought by adverse climatic changes by developing favorable global temperature rise in the century, for the world to experience a 2 degrees Celsius decrease in the industrialized areas. According to the Paris agreement, the countries, as a whole, should develop different efforts to ensure that the nations experience a 2 degrees Celsius temperature drop. The deal is significant in that it will strengthen countries’ abilities to deal with the results brought by climatic changes as it is realized that it is changing in every century.
The United States committing itself to the deal will again enable it to oversee more developments in the country as a specific financial flow should be witnessed, new technologies developed, and an enhanced capacity building framework brought into existence which will support the actions of the nation by promoting them invulnerable and reliable nations, thus meeting their set objectives (NSTC, 2008). The Paris deal has again provided enough transparency of the efforts by each state and developed a very clear framework for the nations to fight the effects of climate change within a set period.
According to my understanding, we can experience global warming as a result of continued air pollution and increased industrialization by many countries in the world. As the days go by, many industries are constructed and a mechanism is not put in place to protect the polluted air from entering the atmosphere. On the other hand, the Paris agreement has impacted my stand on global warming as it has enabled me to realize that different countries can come together thus developing mechanisms objectively to reduce the occurrence of global warming.
As a result of global warming water resources have been affected, leading to a decline in irrigation supplies. This occurs due to the loss of the mountain snowpack hence reducing the amounts of water for the ir ...
Court: the last resort. You opposed Alberta Environment’s decision to approve or refuse a regulated activity. Maybe there was no environmental impact assessment. Maybe an appeal to the Environmental Appeals Board was unsuccessful.
On February 25th, Adam Driedzic, Staff Counsel with the Environmental Law Centre, discussed judicial review of administrative decision-making. He covered key questions for potential litigants, including:
* How is reviewing procedural fairness different from appealing the result?
* What remedies can the court award, and what are the risks?
* Who may have standing in the courts, and when should they start proceedings?
A Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania decision against the oil and gas industry in a case that sought to bar the state Dept. of Environmental Protection from considering nebulous impacts on the public and natural resources when considering whether or not to grant a drilling permit.
EQT Notice of Appeal Contesting DEP Order Finding Greene County Spill Led to ...Marcellus Drilling News
The appeal from EQT in response to a finding/order by the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) in which the DEP alleges a 2010 spill at an EQT drilling site in Greene County, PA led to permanent pollution of a nearby fresh water spring.
1
EMTALA & PATIENT- CENTEREDNESS
Week 9 Assignment
Faridah Mohammad
HA330-44
06/22/2019
1
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:40:10-07:00
This needs to be including at the top left of every page of this paper
2
1. What was the reasoning for enacting the Emergency Medical Treatment and
Active Labour Act?
EMTALA is a form of activism that has been implemented to perform different functions in
the healthcare section. Major reasoning for engaging the EMTALA includes the stabilization
of critical patients in emergent situations before being taken to any medical center as needed.
This is done through proper evaluation of the condition and determining the best way of
responding to a critical state of affairs of the patient. Key other reasons will include the
aspect of preventing more damage and impairment of one's health and also gives room to
determine the best receiving hospital with the necessary facilities, skills, and medical
capabilities. Also in addition to that, there is a chance to record every step of the patient's
state of health (Jeremy &Julia, 2016).
2. Should medical advice be dispensed on the Telephone? Explain your opinion.
In this case, medical advice can be dispensed over the phone depending on what the situation
entails. If it's on general medical situations, then it's ok as this has few of its benefits.
Through the telephone, one can have excellent advice as in most cases, skilled medical
expertise is the ones allowed to give the advice hence dependable information is provided.
Also, its time saving as there are cases where the patient has doubts and instead of meeting up
with doctors can consult through the phone. In the case of the emergent situations, life could
be saved through first aid performance before urgent help is availed. Such medical advice
involves privacy between the client and doctor and it's cost-effective. However, it's key to
have a disclaimer of the medical situation to maintain strictly a doctor-patient relationship
(Ellen, 2014).
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:41:29-07:00
Which case are you referring to here?
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:42:12-07:00
Not sure what you are trying to say here
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:43:20-07:00
Do you mean "experts"? Proofread
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:44:56-07:00
I really have no idea what point you are trying to make here.
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:55:48-07:00
It is not a form of activism, it is a Federal Law!
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:56:32-07:00
This is the wrong word to use in this sentence.
Justin Doheny @ 2019-07-09T08:58:06-07:00
This response does not really address the question. It does not really explain why it was passed,which is the question.
3
3. Why prescribing, control, administration, and monitoring of medication is a
major area of legal concern for healthcare professionals?
Legal concerns analyze the legitimacy of conducting cert.
Similar to Assignment DetailsPower’s on, Power’s Off!How convenient is.docx (20)
Assignment DetailsScenario You are member of a prisoner revie.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Scenario:
You are member of a prisoner review board for a minimum-security facility in your state. Included among the inmates are a number of heroin addicts who were charged with possession crimes and some minor thefts through which they supported their habits.
Please include answers in your main post for the following questions:
What are the methods of treatment for heroin addiction?
What is the difference between heroin detoxification and heroin addiction treatment?
What is the best method for ensuring the heroin addict does not return to heroin abuse? Does long-term incarceration play a role?
.
Assignment DetailsScenario You are an investigator for Child .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Scenario:
You are an investigator for Child Protective Services in your community. One of the most difficult aspects of interviewing is the interview of a suspected victim of child sexual abuse. Often, the first interviewers are detectives or investigators from the police department with little or no training for interviewing child sexual abuse victims. The Commander of the Sex Crimes Unit would like to you to identify errors in interviewing by police investigators when questioning child sex crime victims about the circumstances during the alleged offense(s). The psychopathology of the suspect and the victim are very important, but the victim can be misled unintentionally by police resulting in false or inaccurate complaint information.
The Commander of the Sex Crimes Unit would like you to outline and explain the specific areas to be avoided when questioning a child as a sex crime victim.
Specifically, he is concerned with the following:
The use of suggestive questions
The implication of confirmation by other people
Use of positive and negative consequences
Repetitious questioning
Inviting speculation
In a 3–5-page paper, address the specific concerns, and explain why it is preferable to have the child interviewed by a person with the qualifications to potentially testify as an expert witness in subsequent criminal trials
.
Assignment DetailsScenario You are a new patrol officer in a .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Scenario:
You are a new patrol officer in a major metropolitan city in the center of the country. You have only been on patrol for about four weeks but notice that the officers with more time on the street have been making racially disparaging jokes about members of the poorer neighborhoods. What surprised you was the number of African-American and Hispanic officers who seemed to go along with the culture of racially biased comments. The community in which your precinct is located is crime-ridden and poor. It is largely African-American and Hispanic-American.
When you are on the street, you note that the tension between minority members of the community is very high and that it is even worse between minority officers and the minority community, who tend to view the minority officers as “race traitors.”
In addition, there are a number of combat veterans who have returned to the police department from Iraq and Afghanistan. These veterans have developed a prejudiced outlook towards the Muslim Community, which has a peaceful Mosque in the very center of the community.
Focus your discussion on the following:
Explain your viewpoint as to whether racism and religious bias are based on psychopathology of the officers or not.
.
Assignment DetailsScenario Generally, we have considered sexual.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Scenario: Generally, we have considered sexual harassment actions or verbal abuse of women to be done by men. Over the past several decades, the culture of society has evolved. The diversity of sex and gender has erupted from male abuses of females based on their biology. Now, there are gender reassignments which allow for persons with the psychological inclination to be the gender other than what they were born as being possible. Further, there are a number of transgender persons who, while retaining their biological configuration, adopt the psyche and outward appearance through dress and mannerisms of what is considered to be the traditional opposite gender of their physiology.
Recently, a newly assigned outwardly female officer was found out by her teammates in a Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) unit to actually be a biological male. Several of the SWAT team members have come to you as the SWAT Command Leader and have voiced their concern because the transgender officer uses the ladies room, wears makeup, and dresses as a woman in her civilian attire at the end of the shift. The officers making the complaint are claiming that someone with a psychopathological problem should not be in the SWAT unit. You go to the Deputy Chief with their concerns and she tells you to prepare a briefing for the SWAT members concerning the requirements for SWAT team membership and that if an officer makes the grade, he or she has the opportunity to be a SWAT officer.
In a 3–5-page paper, you must explain to the officers, including those who complained as well as those who did not complain, that the department supports the assignment of the new officer and that according to law, she must be accepted as a valid member of the team so long as she is qualified. Further, explain that transphobia is not an acceptable attitude for members of the team and that any discriminatory action on the part of officers concerning the new officer would not be tolerated and would be met with appropriate disciplinary action.
.
Assignment DetailsIn 1908, playwright Israel Zangwill referred to .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
In 1908, playwright Israel Zangwill referred to America as a
melting pot
. Zangwill’s concept of the United States as a country where people of all cultures and nations are free to come and contribute to a common American culture remains a popular concept—even more than a century after its introduction.
More recently, the concept of the American mosaic asserts that American society consist not of melting pot in which people and cultures mix together to form a larger American culture, but as a mosaic in which ethnic groups come to the United States and coexist with other groups but maintain significant cultural and social distinctions among themselves.
Post a discussion that explores these themes by demonstrating how various cultures and ethnicities have contributed to modern American history and culture. Select 1 ethnic group, and include the following in your discussion:
Part 1
Explain a specific contribution that this group made to American society or culture.
Part 2
Evaluate the concepts of the melting pot and the American mosaic.
Which concept more accurately reflects the experiences of the ethnic group you chose? Support your assertion.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Choose one (1) Native American tribe residing within the continental United States (Lower 48 states) at the time of first European contact. Research various aspects of the chosen tribe’s culture or history. Make sure ample historical records exist for the chosen tribe. Some tribes are not well-documented in the existing historical record.
Topics that
need
to be researched include but are not limited to:
Describing what is known of the tribe’s pre-Columbian history, including settlement dates and any known cultural details.
Describing the cultural and religious beliefs of the chosen tribe.
Describing the tribe’s history after contact, including major events and armed conflicts that may have been important to the history of the tribe in the present day.
Explaining the history of at least one historical figure of the chosen tribe and events surrounding that individual’s life
.
Assignment DetailsPart IRespond to the following.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Part I
Respond to the following:
Review your course materials and the Internet to find information on the crime data sources available for different countries and the United States. Which of the following crime data sources provides the clearest and most helpful information, and why?
Uniform Crime Report (UCR)
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)
International Crime Victims Survey (ICVS)
.
Assignment DetailsPlease discuss the following in your main post.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Please discuss the following in your main post:
Identify the classes of employees protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Why was Affirmative Action put into place?
Do you think Title VII and Affirmative Action are still necessary? Why or why not?
.
Assignment DetailsPennsylvania was the leader in sentencing and .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Pennsylvania was the leader in sentencing and correctional reform in the early history of the United States. Discuss what groups were associated with this reform.
Why did they want the reform?
Examine whether it was successful and if the reform brought forth further changes.
What influences did the system have on the correctional system today?
What influences have changed? Why?
Use the Internet, library, and any other resources available to research your answer. Submit a 4–5-page paper (double-spaced) to your instructor. Support your reasoning with outside sources. Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.
The following will be the grading criteria for this assignment:
20%:
Discuss what groups were associated with this reform.
10%:
Why did they want the reform?
20%:
Examine whether it was successful and if the reform brought forth further changes.
25%:
What direct influences do you see from the Pennsylvania system in the correctional systems used today?
25%:
What influences have changed? Why?
.
Assignment DetailsPart IRespond to the followingReview .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Part I
Respond to the following:
Review your course materials and the Internet to find information on the crime data sources available for different countries and the United States. Which of the following crime data sources provides the clearest and most helpful information, and why?
Uniform Crime Report (UCR)
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)
International Crime Victims Survey (ICVS)
United Nations Surveys on Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (UN-CTS)
.
Assignment DetailsPart IRespond to the following questio.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Part I
Respond to the following questions:
What examples of organized crime can you find in the United States?
What factors contribute to the existence of the criminal organizations you described?
Provide examples of the ways in which the U.S. criminal justice system is dealing with the types of organized crime that you found.
What law enforcement agencies are involved?
How do those law enforcement agencies work to control organized crime?
Part II
Suggestions for responding to peer posts:
Review peers’ posts that used examples of different types of organized crime than the ones that you found.
Were some of the factors that he or she believes contributed to these crimes the same? What different factors were mentioned?
Are the methods of dealing with this type of organized crime different from those devised to deal with the type of organized crime that you found?
.
Assignment DetailsPart IRespond to the following questions.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Part I
Respond to the following questions:
What examples of organized crime can you find in the United States?
What factors contribute to the existence of the criminal organizations you described?
Provide examples of the ways in which the U.S. criminal justice system is dealing with the types of organized crime that you found.
What law enforcement agencies are involved?
How do those law enforcement agencies work to control organized crime?
.
Assignment DetailsOne thing that unites all humans—despite cultu.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
One thing that unites all humans—despite culture or time period—is the desire to be happy. Since the beginning of Western philosophy, philosophers have been asking the question, “How can I find happiness?” In popular culture, there are articles in magazines, newspapers, and discussions on the Internet and television about the pursuit of happiness.
Part 1
What are some of the ways that people pursue happiness?
Do you believe that it can be obtained?
Discuss with others what you consider to be an impression of the state of happiness.
Part 2
Why do you think that people differ in their interpretations of happiness?
What do your reading sources say about this?
Have you changed your perception of happiness over the years?
Discuss with 2 or more classmates their interpretation of happiness.
For assistance with your assignment, please use your text, Web resources, and all course materials.
.
Assignment Details
MN551:
Develop cooperative relationships with clients when teaching concepts concerning pathological states to individuals and families
Select one of the case studies below, and include discussion of your strategy for winning the patients cooperation while teaching concepts concerning pathological states to them and their families.
Requirements
Make sure all of the topics in the case study have been addressed.
Cite at least three sources; journal articles, textbooks or evidenced-based websites to support the content.
All sources must be within five years.
Do not use .com, Wikipedia, or up-to-date, etc., for your sources.
Case Study 1
Concepts of Altered Health in Older Adults
Joseph P. is an 82-year-old male living at home. He is in overall good health and enjoys taking long walks as often as possible. During his walks, he likes to stop for a cold glass of fruit juice at the local cafeteria. On cold or rainy days, he rides a stationary bicycle at home for 30 minutes to “stay in good shape.”
What physiological factors would typically increase Joseph’s risk of falling while walking outdoors?
What are the common changes in blood pressure regulation that occurs with aging?
Joseph enjoys fruit juice when he walks. Considering the renal system in the older adult, why would dehydration be a particular concern?
Case Study 2
Structure and Function of the Kidney
Rivka is an active 21-year-old who decided to take a day off from her university classes. The weather was hot and the sun bright, so she decided to go down to the beach. When she arrived, she found a few people playing beach volleyball, and they asked if she wanted to join in. She put down her school bag and began to play. The others were well prepared for their day out and stopped throughout the game to have their power drinks and soda pop. Several hours after they began to play, however, Rivka was not feeling so good. She stopped sweating and was feeling dizzy. One player noted she had not taken a washroom break at all during the day. They found a shaded area for her, and one of the players shared his power drink with her. Rivka was thirstier than she realized and quickly finished the drink.
In pronounced dehydration, hypotension can occur. How would this affect the glomerular filtration rate of the kidney? What actions by the juxtaglomerular apparatus would occur to restore GFR?
What is the effect aldosterone has on the distal convoluted tubule? Why would the actions of aldosterone be useful to Rivka in her situation?
What does a specific gravity test measure? If someone tested the specific gravity of Rivka’s urine, what might it indicate?
Case Study 3
Disorders of Fluid and Electrolyte Balance
Amanda is an 18-year-old with anorexia nervosa. She was recently admitted to an eating disorders clinic with a BMI of 13.9, and although she was a voluntary patient, she was reluctant about the treatment. She was convinced she was overweigh.
Assignment DetailsIn this assignment, you will identify and .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
In this assignment, you will identify and select a historical or present-day terrorist group to describe and develop a group profile of. In 2–3 pages, address the following:
Identify and select a present-day or historical terrorist group. Identify the group’s underlying motivation, purpose, and objectives.
Develop the group’s profile by crafting a background and discussion on how your selected group was established, how it evolved, and how it ceased to exist, as applicable. If the group is still operating, outline how and why it continues to exist.
Develop and explore some potential counterterrorism or mitigative options. For a historical group, outline how the group was dealt with to the point that it no longer served as an influencing factor.
Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.
.
Assignment DetailsFinancial statements are the primary means of .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Financial statements are the primary means of communicating financial information to users. It is important to have a firm understanding of the income statement, balance sheet, and statement of cash flows. Managers will make decisions daily that will have an effect on the elements of the accounting equation: Assets = Liabilities + Owners’ Equity. Managerial accounting reports use these same financial statements but also incorporate non-financial information that will assist internal users in making strategic and tactical decisions. For this reason, it is important for you to understand how decisions will affect the accounting equation.
The following spreadsheet is for Manhattan Family Dentistry on January 1 of the current year.
Complete the following balance sheet for Manhattan Family Dentistry on January 4 of the current year.
.
Assignment DetailsIn this assignment, you will identify a pr.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
In this assignment, you will identify a present-day controversial issue, such as immigration, government encroachment on privacy, anti-capitalism, and so on. In 2–3 pages, address the following:
Identify and select a present-day issue that can potentially polarize a specific risk group.
Develop and explore the issue and why it can serve as a polarizing and divisive issue. Discuss how certain risk populations can become radicalized and justify the use of violence to elevate their position.
Place yourself in the role of a policy maker. What kind of legislation could you propose to address the social, political, or economic conditions you described above? How will your proposed solutions improve conditions for the specific risk group you identified?
Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.
.
Assignment DetailsHealth information technology (health IT) .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Health information technology (health IT) makes it possible for health care providers to better manage patient care through secure use and sharing of health information. Health IT includes the use of electronic health records (EHRs) instead of paper medical records to maintain people's health information.
Share the EHR platform that your practice uses and discuss the challenges and barriers to electronic charting. Why have we moved from paper charting to EHR’s? What is meant by meaningful use regulations and why is this important to know when documenting in the EHR?
Please support your work with at least three evidence based practice resources that are less than 5 years old.
Written Paper (Microsoft Word doc): minimum 2000 words using 6th edition APA formatting
Please review the grading rubric under Course Resources in the Grading Rubric section.
.
Assignment DetailsDiscuss the followingWhat were some of .docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Discuss the following:
What were some of the major criticisms that led some states to abandon the indeterminate sentence and parole?
Do you support abolition of indeterminate sentence and parole? Why or why not? Please support your position.
Be sure to cite all references in APA format.
.
Assignment DetailsEvaluating Your Own Risk for Inherited Disease.docxfaithxdunce63732
Assignment Details
Evaluating Your Own Risk for Inherited Disease
This two-part assignment will allow you to evaluate the role our genes play in the development of certain diseases. Additionally, you will demonstrate your ability to use electronic database for research purposes.
First, think about your individual health and health risks, by considering what genetic diseases or problems are prevalent in your family. Do you have a predisposition to breast cancer, diabetes, hypertension or any other disease? You may consider your own health risks or those of other individuals such as a family member or friend. Then, in a paper of 750–1,000 words, address the following:
Part I: Evaluating Risk for Disease
· What genetic diseases or problems did you identify to be potential issues?
· Choose one of these diseases and provide an introduction of the disease, including the reason why this would be considered to be a genetic/inherited disease?
· Discuss the major signs/symptoms of the disorder. Research the mode of inheritance for your chosen disease and provide a thorough discussion of the mode of inheritance. If you are not able to find a specific mode of inheritance, provide a hypothesis for the mode of inheritance. Explain your reasoning thoroughly.
· What information would help an individual who has been recently diagnosed with the disease?
· What would you say to a family member who is also at risk for developing the disease? What should they know about passing this disease trait to their children?
Part II: Purdue Global Library Search
Finally, visit the library by clicking on My Studies and then selecting the “Library” link on the Campus homepage. Select the option to perform an advanced search by scrolling down to Quick Links and selecting “Advanced Search: EBSCO Discovery Service". Answer the following questions:
· Search for the disease/trait you selected in Part I of this assignment. What search term(s) did you use?
· Use a combination of search terms. Which method resulted in the most “hits” or results?
· What is the difference between this PG library search and a search on a search engine (e.g., Google)?
· Which search is more appropriate for academic research? Why?
· Select two credible sources from your Purdue Global Library Search and briefly explain whether these references support or contradict your previous conclusions regarding your selected disease. Please ensure that you have included these sources in your references page.
BHR 4680, Training and Development 1
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit VI
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
4. Examine performance appraisal information in order to obtain individual analysis data.
4.1 Identify how performance appraisals contribute to employee development and career
management.
7. Explain the importance of succession planning.
7.1 Identify the need for a succession plan.
Course/Unit
Learning Outcomes
Learning Activity
4.1
Unit VI Lesso.
Honest Reviews of Tim Han LMA Course Program.pptxtimhan337
Personal development courses are widely available today, with each one promising life-changing outcomes. Tim Han’s Life Mastery Achievers (LMA) Course has drawn a lot of interest. In addition to offering my frank assessment of Success Insider’s LMA Course, this piece examines the course’s effects via a variety of Tim Han LMA course reviews and Success Insider comments.
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
Francesca Gottschalk - How can education support child empowerment.pptxEduSkills OECD
Francesca Gottschalk from the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation presents at the Ask an Expert Webinar: How can education support child empowerment?
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docxvaibhavrinwa19
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
Welcome to TechSoup New Member Orientation and Q&A (May 2024).pdfTechSoup
In this webinar you will learn how your organization can access TechSoup's wide variety of product discount and donation programs. From hardware to software, we'll give you a tour of the tools available to help your nonprofit with productivity, collaboration, financial management, donor tracking, security, and more.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
Assignment DetailsPower’s on, Power’s Off!How convenient is.docx
1. Assignment Details:
Power’s on, Power’s Off!
How convenient is it to have electricity come right to your
home? We use electricity for so many things: lighting, heating,
cooling, entertainment, cleaning, food storage and preparation,
and even for taking this class!
Generating electricity from any source creates varying levels of
environmental damage, including ecosystem disruption, water
contamination, or polluting gas emissions. If we reduce energy
use, then we reduce these environmental impacts.
We make choices about our energy use based on how we feel
about conservation, the environment, and convenience. Reflect
on your energy use, and review the following resources:
Review the tips at this site for ideas to reduce energy use at
home.
Review this site for power outage readiness.
Assignment Details:
Respond to the questions for ONE of the following scenarios:
Power’s off!
When the power goes out, explain your biggest inconvenience.
What do you manage to live without?
If the power is out for 3 days or more, what are your main
concerns? What are the absolute essentials? How do you know
food is safe?
Explain what the best back-up source for a power outage would
be (for example, solar panels, a gas-powered generator, or even
a power inverter for your car).
Include 1 benefit and 1 drawback. What is your back-up plan?
2. Power’s on!
In the U.S., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning accounts
(HVAC) for 48% of home electricity costs (DoE, 2018).
Describe one behavior you can change to reduce heating or
cooling energy use.
Americans pay 9% of their electricity costs for lighting (EIA,
2018a). Explain how changing all of your light bulbs to LEDs
can help save energy.
On average, 18% of home electricity costs go to heating water
(EIA, 2018b). Describe one way to reduce hot water use. How
easy or difficult is this to do?
Deliverable Length: 200 words (minimum)
Reading Assignment
Read the following chapter sections in Environmental Science:
Chapter 9: Energy and the Environment
Environmental Science by Editorial Board
Publisher Words of Wisdom, LLC
ISBN 9781943926169
Course Code SCIE210-20
References:
EnergySage. (2018, August 2). Energy conservation: 10 ways to
save energy. Retrieved from
https://www.energysage.com/energy-efficiency/101/ways-to-
save-energy/
3. Ready.gov. (n.d.). Power outages. Retrieved from
https://www.ready.gov/power-outages
U.S. Department of Energy (DoE). (2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.energy.gov/heating-cooling
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2018a).
Frequently asked questions: How much electricity is used for
lighting in the United States? Retrieved from:
https://www.energy.gov/heating-cooling
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2018b). Use of
energy in the United States explained: Energy use in homes.
Retrieved from:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=us_energ
y_homes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page1 of
29
14-4626
Berman v. [email protected] LLC
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
August Term 2014
4. Argued: June 17, 2015 Decided: September 10, 2015
Docket No. 14-4626
DANIEL BERMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
[email protected] LLC, WPP GROUP USA, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Before: NEWMAN, JACOBS, and CALABRESI, Circuit Judges.
Appeal from the December 8, 2014, judgment of the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York (Gregory H. Woods, District Judge), dismissing, for
failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted, an
employee’s suit claiming that his discharge violated the
whistleblower protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The District
Court ruled that these provisions protect only employees
5. discharged for reporting violations to the Securities and
Exchange Commission and not those reporting violations only
1
CERTIFIED COPY ISSUED ON 09/10/2015
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page2 of
29
internally. See Berman v. [email protected] LLC, No. 1:14-cv-
523-
GHW-SN, 2014 WL 6860583 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2014).
Reversed and remanded. Judge Jacobs dissents with a
separate opinion.
Alissa Pyrich, Jardim, Meisner &
Susser, P.C., Florham Park, NJ
(Bennet Susser, Richard S.
Meisner, Jardim, Meisner &
Susser, P.C., Florham Park, NJ,
on the brief), for Appellant.
Howard J. Rubin, Davis & Gilbert
LLP, New York, NY (Jennifer
Tafet Klausner, David J.
Fisher, Davis & Gilbert LLP,
New York, NY, on the brief),
6. for Appellees.
(William K. Shirey, Asst. Gen.
Counsel, Washington, DC (Anne
K. Small, Gen. Counsel, Michael
A. Conley, Deputy Gen. Counsel,
Stephen G. Yoder, Senior
Counsel, Washington, DC), for
amicus curiae Securities and
Exchange Commission, in support
of Appellant.)
(Kate Comerford Todd, U.S.
Chamber Litigation Center,
Inc., Washington, DC, Eugene
Scalia, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
LLP, Washington, DC (Rachel E.
Mondel, Gabrielle Levine on the
brief) for amicus curiae The
Chamber of Commerce of the
United States of America, in
support of the Appellees.)
2
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page3 of
29
JON O. NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.
This appeal presents the recurring issue of statutory
interpretation that arises when express terms in one
7. provision of a statute are arguably in tension with language
in another provision of the same statute. The Supreme Court
recently encountered a similar issue when it interpreted a
provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
in Burwell v. King, 135 S. Ct. 2480 (2015). In the pending
case, the tension occurs within the whistleblower protection
provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”). Pub. L. No. 111-203, Title
IX, § 922(a), 124 Stat. 1376, 1841 (2010), which added
section 21F to the Exchange Act of 1934, codified at 15
U.S.C. § 78u-6. The relevant administrative agency, the
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or
“Commission”),
has issued a regulation endeavoring to harmonize the
provisions that are in tension.
Plaintiff-Appellant Daniel Berman appeals from the
December 8, 2014, judgment of the District Court for the
Southern District of New York (Gregory H. Woods, District
8. Judge), dismissing on motion for summary judgment his suit
against Defendants-Appellees [email protected] LLC and WPP
Group
USA, Inc. See Berman v. [email protected] LLC, No. 1:14-cv-
523-GHW-
3
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page4 of
29
SN, 2014 WL 6860583 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2014). We conclude
that the pertinent provisions of Dodd-Frank create a
sufficient ambiguity to warrant our deference to the SEC’s
interpretive rule, which supports Berman’s view of the
statute. We therefore reverse and remand for further
proceedings.
Background
The statutory and regulatory provisions. Section 21F,
added to the Exchange Act by Dodd-Frank, is captioned
“Securities Whistleblower Incentives and Protection.” 15
9. U.S.C. § 78u-6. Subsection 21F(b) provides the incentives
by directing the SEC to pay awards to individuals whose
reports to the Commission about violations of the securities
laws result in successful Commission enforcement actions.
See 15 U.S.C. § 78u-6(b). Subsection 21F(h) provides the
protection by prohibiting employers from retaliation against
employees for reporting violations. Id. § 78u-6(h).
This appeal concerns the relationship between the
definition of “whistleblower” in section 21F and one
subdivision of the provision prohibiting retaliation, which
was added by a conference committee just before final
passage. Subsection 21F(a), the definitions subsection of
section 21F, contains subsection 21F(a)(6), which defines
4
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page5 of
29
“whistleblower” to mean “any individual who provides . . .
10. information relating to a violation of the securities laws
to the Commission . . . .” Id. 78u-6(a)(6) (emphasis added).
Subsection 21F(h), the retaliation protection provision,
contains subsection 21F(h)(1)(A), which provides:
(A) In General
No employer may discharge, demote, suspend,
threaten, harass, directly or indirectly, or in
any other manner discriminate against, a
whistleblower in the terms and conditions of
employment because of any lawful act done by the
whistleblower—
(i) in providing information to the Commission
in accordance with this section;
(ii) in initiating, testifying in, or
assisting in any investigation or judicial or
administrative action of the Commission based
upon or related to such information; or
(iii) in making disclosures that are required
or protected under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (15 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.), this chapter
[i.e., the Exchange Act], including section
78j-1(m) of this title [i.e., Section 10A(m)
of the Exchange Act], section 1513(e) of Title
18, and any other law, rule, or regulation
subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission.
Id. 78u-6(h)(1)(A).
11. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”),
Public L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 475 (2002), which is cross-
referenced by subdivision (iii) of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A)
of Dodd-Frank, includes several provisions concerning the
5
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page6 of
29
internal reporting of securities law violations or improper
practices.
For example, section 307 of Sarbanes-Oxley requires the
SEC to issue rules requiring an attorney to report
securities law violations to the chief legal counsel or
chief executive officer of the company. See 15 U.S.C.
§ 7245(1). Section 301 of Sarbanes-Oxley added to the
Exchange Act section 10A(m)(4), requires the SEC by rule to
direct national securities exchanges and national securities
associations to require audit committees of listed companies
12. to establish internal company procedures allowing employees
to submit complaints regarding auditing matters. This
section is not codified. Section 806(a) of Sarbanes-Oxley
prohibits a publicly traded company from retaliating against
an employee who provides information concerning securities
law violations to, among other, a federal regulatory or law
enforcement agency, a member of Congress, or “a person with
supervisory authority over the employee.” 18 U.S.C.
§ 1514A(a)(1).
This appeal concerns the arguable tension between the
definitional subsection, subsection 21F(a)(6), which defines
“whistleblower” to mean an individual who reports violations
to the Commission, and subdivision (iii) of subsection
6
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page7 of
29
21F(h)(1)(A), which, unlike subdivisions (i) and (ii), does
13. not within its own terms limit its protection to those who
report wrongdoing to the SEC. On the contrary, subdivision
(iii) expands the protections of Dodd-Frank to include the
whistleblower protection provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley, and
those provisions, which contemplate an employee reporting
violations internally, do not require reporting violations
to the Commission.
In statutory terms, the issue presented is whether the
“whistleblower” definition in subsection 21F(a)(6) of Dodd-
Frank applies to subdivision (iii) of subsection
21F(h)(1)(A). In operational terms, the issue is whether an
employee who suffers retaliation because he reports
wrongdoing internally, but not to the SEC, can obtain the
retaliation remedies provided by Dodd-Frank.
The SEC believes he can. In 2011, using its authority
to issue rules implementing section 21F, see 15 U.S.C.
§ 78u-6(j), the SEC promulgated Exchange Act Rule 21F-2, 17
C.F.R. § 240.21F-2, which provides:
14. (a) Definition of a whistleblower.
(1) You are a whistleblower if, alone or jointly
with others, you provide the Commission with
information pursuant to the procedures set forth
in § 240.21F–9(a) of this chapter, and the
7
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page8 of
29
information relates to a possible violation of the
Federal securities laws (including any rules or
regulations thereunder) that has occurred, is
ongoing, or is about to occur. A whistleblower
must be an individual. A company or another entity
is not eligible to be a whistleblower.
(2) To be eligible for an award, you must submit
original information to the Commission in
accordance with the procedures and conditions
described in §§ 240.21F–4, 240.21F–8, and
240.21F–9 of this chapter.
(b) Prohibition against retaliation.
(1) For purposes of the anti-retaliation protections
afforded by Section 21F(h)(1) of the Exchange Act (15
U.S.C. 78u–6(h)(1)), you are a whistleblower if:
(i) You possess a reasonable belief that the
15. information you are providing relates to a possible
securities law violation (or, where applicable, to a
possible violation of the provisions set forth in 18
U.S.C. 1514A(a)) that has occurred, is ongoing, or is
about to occur, and;
(ii) You provide that information in a manner described
in Section 21F(h)(1)(A) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C.
78u–6(h)(1)(A)).
(iii) The anti-retaliation protections apply whether or
not you satisfy the requirements, procedures and
conditions to qualify for an award.1
1 Just recently, on August 4, 2015, the SEC issued a
release “to clarify that, for purposes of the employment
retaliation protections provided by Section 21F of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), an
individuals’s status as a whistleblower does not depend on
adherence to the reporting procedures specified in Exchange
8
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page9 of
29
Echoing section 21F(a)(6) of Dodd-Frank, subsection
21F-2(a)(1) of Exchange Act Rule 21F-2 defines a
whistleblower as a person who “provide[s] the Commission”
with specific information. 17 C.F.R. § 240.21F-2(a)(1).
16. However, subsection 21F-2(b) of the Rule, headed “Protection
against retaliation,” provides, in subdivision 21F-2(b)(ii)
that, for purposes of the retaliation protections of Dodd-
Frank, a person is a whistleblower if the person
“provide[s]” specified information “in a manner described
in” the retaliation protection provisions of Dodd-Frank,
which includes the cross-reference in subdivision (iii) to
the reporting provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley. Id. § 240.21F-
2(b)(ii). Those provisions, as explained above, protect an
employee who reports internally without reporting to the
Commission.
As the SEC explained in its release accompanying
issuance of Exchange Rule 21F–2, “the statutory anti-
retaliation protections [of Dodd-Frank] apply to three
Act Rule 21F-9(a) [specifying procedures to be followed to
qualify for a whistleblower award], but is determined solely
by the terms of Exchange Act Rule 21F2(b)(1).”
Interpretation of the SEC’s Whistleblower Rules Under
Section 21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, SEC
Release No. 34-75592, 2015 WL 4624264 (F.R.) (Aug. 4, 2015).
17. 9
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page10
of 29
different categories of whistleblowers, and the third
category [described in subdivision (iii) of subsection
21F(h)(1)(A)] includes individuals who report to persons or
governmental authorities other than the Commission.”
Securities Whistleblower Incentives and Protections, Release
No. 34-64545, 76 Fed. Reg. 34300-01, at *34304, 2011 WL
2293084 (F.R.) (June 13, 2011) (emphasis added).
So the more precise issue in the pending appeal is
whether the arguable tension between the definitional
section of subsection 21F(a)(6) and subdivision (iii) of
subsection 21(F)(h)(1)(A) creates sufficient ambiguity as to
the coverage of subdivision (iii) to oblige us to give
Chevron deference to the SEC’s rule. See Chevron U.S.A.,
Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S.
18. 837 (1984).
The pending lawsuit. Plaintiff-Appellant Daniel Berman
was the finance director of Defendant-Appellee
[email protected]
LLC (“Neo”) from October 2010 to April 2013. He was
responsible for Neo’s financial reporting and its compliance
with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”), as
well as internal accounting procedures of Neo and its
parent, Defendant-Appellee WPP Group USA, Inc. (“WPP”).
Neo
10
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page11
of 29
is a media agency that provides a range of digital and
direct media services.
In January 2014, Berman sued Neo and WPP, alleging that
he was discharged in violation of the whistleblower
protection provisions of section 21F of Dodd-Frank and in
19. breach of his employment contract. According to the
allegation of the complaint, while employed at Neo, he
discovered various practices that he alleged amounted to
accounting fraud. He also alleged that these practices
violated GAAP, Sarbanes-Oxley, and Dodd-Frank, and that he
had reported these violations internally. A senior officer
at Neo became angry with him, and he was terminated as a
result of his whistleblower activities in April 2013. In
August 2013 he reported his allegations to the WPP Audit
Committee.
While employed at Neo and for about six months after he
was fired, Berman did not report any allegedly unlawful
activities to the SEC. In October 2013, after the
limitations period on one of his Sarbanes-Oxley claims had
ended, he provided information to the Commission.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint was
referred to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn. She filed a
11
20. Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page12
of 29
Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that
Berman was
entitled to be considered a whistleblower under Dodd-Frank
because of the retaliation protection of subdivision (iii)
of subsection 21F(h)(A)(1), unrestricted by the definition
of “whistleblower” in subsection 21F(a)(6). However, the
R&R also recommended that the retaliation claims be
dismissed for legal insufficiency, without prejudice to
amendment, and that the contracts claims be dismissed with
prejudice.
The District Court, disagreeing with the Magistrate
Judge, relied on the definition of “whistleblower” in
subsection 21F(a)(6) and ruled that subsection 21F(h)(1)(A),
including subdivision (iii), provided whistleblower
protection only to those discharged for reporting alleged
21. violations to the Commission. The District Court dismissed
the Dodd-Frank claims because Berman had been terminated
long before he reported alleged violations to the SEC. The
District Court also rejected the contract claims and
dismissed the entire complaint. See Berman, 2014 WL 6860583,
at *6. Berman’s appeal challenges only the dismissal of his
Dodd-Frank claim.
12
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page13
of 29
Discussion
The statutory interpretation issue posed by this case
is not as stark, and hence not as easily resolved, as that
encountered in somewhat similar cases.2 In Scialabba v.
Cuellar de Osorio, 134 S. Ct. 2191 (2014), for example, the
express language of one clause of a subsection of a statute
was contradicted by express language in another clause of
22. 2 We start by posing the issue as one of statutory
construction because Berman sued for violation of Dodd-
Frank. If we find the statute ambiguous, we will consider
whether the SEC’s regulation is a reasonable interpretation
of the statute warranting Chevron deference. The SEC begins
its argument by asserting that “‘[t]he interpretation of a
statute by a regulatory agency charged with its
administration is entitled to deference if it is a
permissible construction of the statute.’” Brief for SEC at
17 (citing Haekal v. Refco, Inc., 198 F.3d 37, 41 (2d Cir.
1999)). Then the SEC points out that consideration of
whether an agency interpretation is permissible requires two
steps: first, considering whether there is an “unambiguously
expressed intent of Congress,” Chevron, 467 U.S. at 843, on
“the precise issue in question,” id. at 842, and, second, if
the statute is silent or ambiguous, considering whether the
agency’s interpretation is “based on a permissible
construction of the statute, id. at 843.
Although our approach and the SEC’s both require
initial interpretation of the statute, the reasons for that
inquiry differ. We start with the statute because that is
the basis for Berman’s claim. His complaint does not
mention the SEC’s rule. The SEC starts with the statute to
determine whether its regulation is entitled to Chevron
deference. Chevron, in which the two-step analysis was
outlined, was a suit challenging the validity of an agency
regulation.
13
23. Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page14
of 29
the same subsection. See id. at 2207 (“[T]he two halves of
[8 U.S.C.] § 1153(h)(3) face in different directions.”). In
Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S. 457
(1892), application of the express terms of a statute to the
facts of a case yielded a result so unlikely to have been
intended by Congress that the Supreme Court did not apply
those terms.3 See id. at 472 (declining to apply to a
church’s contract with a British pastor a prohibition on
contracting to import an alien to perform labor of any
kind).
Closer to our case is the issue the Supreme Court
recently confronted in Burwell v. King. There, four words
of one provision expressly provided that income tax
subsidies were available to those who purchased health
insurance on exchanges “established by a state,” and the
argument made to the Court was that the operation of the
entire statute would be undermined if tax subsidies were not
24. also available to those who purchased health insurance on
3 See also Yates v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1074, 1079
(2015) (declining to apply literal meaning of “tangible
object” as used in Sarbanes-Oxley” to a fish); Bond v.
United States, 134 S. Ct. 2077, 2091 (2014) (declining to
apply express terms of definition of “chemical weapon” to
toxic chemicals spread by a jilted wife on property of her
husband’s lover).
14
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page15
of 29
exchanges established by the federal government. A closely
divided Court accepted that argument and interpreted the
Affordable Care Act as a whole to provide income tax
subsidies to those who purchased health insurance on federal
exchanges.
The interpretation issue facing the Supreme Court in
King was far more problematic than the issue we face here.
In King the issue was whether the statutory phrase
25. “established by the State” should be understood to mean
“established by the State or by the Federal Government.” In
our case, the statutory provision relied on by the Appellees
and our dissenting colleague contains the phrase “provide
. . . to the Commission,” but the issue is not whether that
phrase means something other than what it literally says.4
Instead, the issue is whether the statutory provision
applies to another provision of the statute, or, more
precisely, whether the answer to that question is
sufficiently unclear to warrant Chevron deference to the
Commission’s regulation.
4 We do not doubt that “provide . . . to the Commission”
means “provide . . . to the Commission.”
15
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page16
of 29
In our case there is no absolute conflict between the
26. Commission notification requirement in the definition of
“whistleblower” and the absence of such a requirement in
both subdivision (iii) of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A) of Dodd-
Frank and the Sarbanes-Oxley provisions incorporated by
subdivision (iii). An employee who suffers retaliation
after reporting wrongdoing simultaneously to his employer
and to the SEC is eligible for Dodd-Frank remedies and those
provided by Sarbanes-Oxley. Subdivision (iii) assures him
the latter remedies, and his simultaneous report to the SEC
assures him that he will not have excluded himself from
Dodd-Frank remedies. Indeed, it was the possibility of
simultaneous complaints to both the employer and the
Commission that persuaded the Fifth Circuit to insist that
the Commission notification requirement be observed by all
employees who seek Dodd-Frank remedies for whistleblower
retaliation. See Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), L.L.C., 720
F.3d 620, 627-28 (5th Cir. 2013).5
5 By using the Fifth Circuit’s example of “simultaneous”
reporting to an employer and to the Commission, we recognize
27. that a literal application of the definition of
“whistleblower” to subdivision (iii) would also benefit
those who reported to the Commission very soon after
reporting to an employer, soon enough to do so before the
employer retaliated by discharging the employee for the
internal reporting (assuming the employer terminated because
of both acts of reporting).
16
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page17
of 29
Although the simultaneous employer/Commission reporting
example avoids an absolute contradiction between the
Commission reporting requirement of the “whistleblower”
definition and subdivision (iii)'s incorporation of
Sarbanes-Oxley remedies, a significant tension within
subsection 21F nevertheless remains. Applying the
Commission reporting requirement to employees seeking
Sarbanes-Oxley remedies pursuant to subdivision (iii) would
leave that subdivision with an extremely limited scope for
several reasons.
28. First, although there may be some potential
whistleblowers who will report wrongdoing simultaneously to
their employer and the Commission, they are likely to be few
in number. Some will surely feel that reporting only to
their employer offers the prospect of having the wrongdoing
ended, with little chance of retaliation, whereas reporting
to a government agency creates a substantial risk of
retaliation.
Second, and more significant, there are categories of
whistleblowers who cannot report wrongdoing to the
Commission until after they have reported the wrongdoing to
their employer. Chief among these are auditors and
attorneys.
17
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page18
of 29
Auditors are subject to subsection 78j-1 of the
29. Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j-1, which is one of the
provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley, expressly cross-referenced by
subdivision (iii). Subsection 78j-1(b)(1)(B) requires an
auditor of a public company, under certain circumstances, to
“inform the appropriate level of the management” of illegal
acts, unless they are inconsequential. See 15 U.S.C. § 78j-
1(b)(1)(B). Subsection 78j-1(b)(2) requires an auditor to
report to the board of directors if the company does not
take reasonable remedial action after the auditor’s report
to management. See id. § 78j-1(b)(2). Significantly to our
case, subsection 78j-1(b)(3)(B) permits an auditor to report
illegal acts to the Commission only if the board or
management fails to take appropriate remedial action. See
id. § 78j-1(b)(3)(B). Thus, if subdivision (iii) requires
reporting to the Commission, its express cross-reference to
the provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley would afford an auditor
almost no Dodd-Frank protection for retaliation because the
auditor must await a company response to internal reporting
30. before reporting to the Commission, and any retaliation
would almost always precede Commission reporting.
Attorneys are subject to both section 307 of Sarbanes-
Oxley, 15 U.S.C. § 7245, and the SEC’s Standards of
18
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page19
of 29
Professional Conduct6 (“Attorney Standards”), 17 C.F.R.
§ 205.1-7, and subdivision (iii) cross-references “any other
law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the
Commission.” Subsection 7245(1) requires attorneys to
report material violations of the securities laws to the
chief legal counsel or chief executive officer (“CEO”) of a
public company, and subsection 7245(2) requires attorneys to
report such violations to the audit or other appropriate
committee of the board of directors if the counsel or CEO
“does not appropriately respond to the attorney’s internal
31. reporting. 15 U.S.C. §§ 7245(1), (2). Again significantly
to our case, the SEC’s Rule 3 of its Attorney Standards
contemplates an attorney reporting to the Commission only
after internal reporting, see 17 C.F.R. § 205.3(d)(2),
explicitly recognizing that by reporting internally first an
attorney “does not reveal client confidences or secrets or
privileged or otherwise protected information related to the
attorney’s representation of the issuer,” id. § 205.3(b)(1).
Like auditors, attorneys would gain little, if any, Dodd-
Frank protection if subdivision (iii), despite cross-
referencing Sarbanes-Oxley provisions protecting lawyers,
6 The full title is “Standards of Professional Conduct
for Attorneys Appearing and Practicing Before the Commission
in the Representation of an Issuer.” 17 C.F.R. § 205.1.
19
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page20
of 29
32. protected only against retaliation for reporting to the
Commission.
Thus, apart from the rare example of simultaneous (or
nearly simultaneous)7 reporting of wrongdoing to an employer
and to the Commission, there would be virtually no situation
where an SEC reporting requirement would leave subdivision
(iii) with any scope.
In light of these realities as to the sharply limiting
effect of a Commission reporting requirement on all
whistleblowers seeking the Sarbanes-Oxley remedies promised
by Dodd-Frank for those who report wrongdoing internally,
the question becomes whether Congress intended to add
subdivision (iii) to subsection 21F(h)(1)(A) only to achieve
such a limited result. To answer that question we would
normally look to the legislative history of subdivision
(iii) to learn what Congress, or the relevant committee, had
sought to accomplish by adding subdivision (iii). See, e.g.,
Vincent v. The Money Store, 736 F.3d 88, 101 n.10 (2d Cir.
33. 2013).
Unfortunately that inquiry yields nothing. What became
subdivision (iii) of subsection 20F(h)(1)(A) was not in
7 See footnote 5, supra.
20
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page21
of 29
either version of Dodd-Frank that was passed by the House
and the Senate prior to a conference.8 After these versions
went to conference, the House Conferees prepared a
“conference base text” to serve as the basis for resolution
of differences by the Conference Committee.
Subdivision (iii) first saw the light of day in that
conference base text when it was added to follow
subdivisions (i) and (ii) of subsection 20F(h)(1)(A), both
of which had been in the Senate version. Unfortunately,
there is no mention of the addition of subdivision (iii),
34. 8 As originally submitted by the Administration on July
22, 2009, the “Financial Services Oversight Council Act of
2009" proposed adding section 21F to the Exchange Act. The
Administration’s proposal included subsection 21F(g)(1)(A),
which entitled an employee to be made whole if discharged
“for providing information ” as provided elsewhere in the
bill. As passed by the House of Representative on Dec. 11,
2009, the “Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of
2009" also proposed adding section 21F to the Exchange Act.
The House version of section 21F included subsection
21F(g)(1)(A), which prohibited retaliation against an
employee for “providing information to the Commission” as
provided elsewhere in the bill, and subsection 21F(g)(4),
which defined “whistleblower” as one or more individuals
“who submit information to the Commission” as provided in
section 21F. See H.R. 4173, 111th Cong., 1st Sess. (2009).
As passed by the Senate on May 20, 2010, the “Restoring
American Financial Stability Act of 2010" also proposed
adding section 21F to the Exchange Act. The Senate version
of section 21F included subsection 21F(a)(7), which copied
the definition of “whistleblower” from H.R. 4173, and
included in subsection 21F(h)(1)(A) the language that would
become subdivisions (i) and (ii) of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A)
of Dodd-Frank. See H.R. 4173, 111th Cong., 2d Sess. (2010).
21
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page22
of 29
35. much less its meaning or intended purpose, in any
legislative materials – not in the conference report nor the
final passage debates on Dodd-Frank in either the House or
the Senate. The “Joint Explanatory Statement of the
Committee of Conference” explains only that “[t]he subtitle
[Subtitle B of Title IX] further enhances incentives and
protections for whistleblowers providing information leading
to successful SEC enforcement actions.” H. Rep. No. 111-517,
at 870 (2009-10) (Conf. Rep.). Subdivision (iii) is, like
Judge Friendly’s felicitous characterization of the Alien
Tort Act, “a kind of legal Lohengrin; . . . no one seems to
know whence it came.” ITT v. Vencap, Ltd., 519 F.2d 1001,
1015 (2d Cir. 1975), abrogated on other grounds by Morrison
v. National Australia Bank, 561 U.S. 247 (2010) .
Other courts confronting the issue of whether the
arguable tension between subsection 21F(a)(6) and
subdivision (iii) of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A) warrants
Chevron deference to Exchange Rule 21F-2 have reached
36. conflicting results. The Fifth Circuit in Asadi, 720 F.3d
at 620, and the District Court decision that Asadi affirmed,
Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), LLC, Civ. Action No. 4:12-345,
2012 WL 2522599 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 28, 2012), both ruled the
subsection 21F(a)(6) definition of “whistleblower”
22
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page23
of 29
controlling. Three other district courts have followed
Asadi. See Verfuerth v. Orion Energy Systems, Inc., 65 F.
Supp. 640, 643-46 (E.D. Wis. 2014); Banko v. Apple Inc., 20
F. Supp. 3d 749, 756-57 (N.D. Cal. 2013); Wagner v. Bank of
America Corp., No. 12-cv-00381-RBJ, 2013 WL 3786643, at
*4-
*6 (D. Colo. July 19, 2013).
On the other hand, a far larger number of district
courts have deemed the statute ambiguous and deferred to the
37. SEC’s Rule. See Somers v. Digital Realty Trust, Inc., No. C-
14-5180 EMC, 2015 WL 2354807, at *4-*12 (N.D. Cal. May 15,
2015); Yang v. Navigators Group, Inc., 18 F. Supp. 3d 519,
533-34 (S.D.N.Y. 2014); Khazin v. TD Ameritrade Holding
Corp. No. 13-4149 (SDWQ)(MCA), 2014 WL 940703, at *3-*6
(D.N.J. Mar. 11, 2014); Azim v. Tortoise Capital Advisors,
LLC, No. 13-2267-KHV, 2014 WL 707235, at *2-3 (D. Kan.
Feb.
24, 2014); Ahmad v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 2 F. Supp. 3d 491,
495-97 n.5 (S.D.N.Y 2014); Rosenblum v. Thomson Reuters
(Mkts.) LLC, 984 F. Supp. 2d 141, 146-49 (S.D.N.Y. 2013);
Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, No. 12-5914, 2013 WL
2190084,
at *4 (S.D.N.Y. May 21, 2013); Ellington v. Giacoumakis, 977
F. Supp. 2d 42, 44-46 (D. Mass. 2013); Genberg v. Porter,
935 F. Supp. 2d 1094, 1106-07 (D. Colo. 2013); Nollner v.
Southern Baptist Convention, Inc., 852 F. Supp. 2d 986, 995
23
38. Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page24
of 29
(M.D. Tenn. 2012); Kramer v. Trans-Lux Corp., No.
3:11CV1424
SRU, 2012 WL 4444820, at *4 (D. Conn. Sept. 25, 2012); Egan
v. Tradingscreen, Inc., No. 10 Civ. 8202, 2011 WL 1672066,
at *4-7 (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 2011). Thus, although our decision
creates a circuit split, it does so against a landscape of
existing disagreement among a large number of district
courts.
Like all these courts, we confront both the definition
of “whistleblower” in subsection 21F(a)(6), which extends
whistleblower protection only to employees who report
violations to the Commission, and the language of
subdivision (iii), which purports to protect employees9 from
retaliation for making reports required or protected by
Sarbanes-Oxley, reports that are made internally, without
notification to the Commission. We recognize that the terms
of a definitional subsection are usually to be taken
39. literally, see Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner, “Reading
9 The dissent chides us for stating that subdivision
(iii) protects “employees” from retaliation for reporting
violations, pointing out correctly that this subdivision
does not use the word “employees.” Dissenting op. [5-6].
However, subsection 21F(h)(1)(A), of which subdivision (iii)
is a component, prohibits an “employer” from taking adverse
action or discriminating against a whistleblower “in the
terms or conditions of employment.” Who but “employees”
could be discriminated against by an “employer” in the terms
and conditions of “employment?”
24
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page25
of 29
Law,” 227 (2012) (“Ordinarily, judges apply text-specific
definitions with rigor.”), and, pertinent to this case,
usually applied to all subdivisions literally covered by the
definition, but we have also recognized that “mechanical use
of a statutory definition” is not always warranted. See In
re Air Cargo Shipping Services Antitrust Litigation, 697
F.3d 154, 163 (2d Cir. 2012). Scalia and Garner too have
40. stated, “Definitions are, after all, just one indication of
meaning – a very strong indication, to be sure, but
nonetheless one that can be contradicted by other
indications.” Scalia and Garner 228. The issue here,
however, is not whether to read the words of the
definitional section literally, but the different issue of
whether the definition should apply to a late-added
subdivision of a subsection that uses the defined term.
In deciding whether sufficient ambiguity exists in
Dodd-Frank to warrant deference to the SEC’s Rule, we note,
but are not persuaded by, the arguments that any reading
would render some language of Dodd-Frank superfluous.
Berman contends that if subdivision (iii) is subject to the
Commission reporting requirement by virtue of subsection
21F(a)(6), then most of subdivision (iii) would be
superfluous because the Sarbanes-Oxley protections
25
41. Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page26
of 29
purportedly incorporated would have no effect. The SEC
argues that if the definition of “whistleblower” applies to
all three subdivisions of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A), then the
Commission reporting requirement, expressly stated in
subdivisions (i) and (ii), would be superfluous. Neo
contends that if subdivision (iii) does not require an
employee to report violations to the Commission, then the
SEC reporting requirement in subsection 21F(a)(6) would be
superfluous.
All these arguments ignore the realities of the
legislative process. When conferees are hastily trying to
reconcile House and Senate bills, each of which number
hundreds of pages, and someone succeeds in inserting a new
provision like subdivision (iii) into subsection
21F(h)(1)(A), it is not at all surprising that no one
noticed that the new subdivision and the definition of
42. “whistleblower” do not fit together neatly.10 The definition
speaks of reporting to the Commission, but subdivision (iii)
incorporates Sarbanes-Oxley provisions, which contemplate
internal reporting, without reporting to the Commission.
Subdivisions (i) and (ii), which were included in the Senate
10 “True ambiguity is almost always the result of
carelessness or inattention.” Scalia and Garner 33.
26
http:neatly.10
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page27
of 29
version of Dodd-Frank before the conferees met, fit
precisely with the “whistleblower” definition. Subdivision
(i) explicitly requires reporting “to the Commission,” and
subdivision (ii) concerns assisting action “of the
Commission,” whereas the terms of subdivision (iii) do
neither.11
When the conferees, at the last minute, inserted
43. subdivision (iii) within subsection 21F(h)(1)(A), did they
expect subdivision (iii) to be limited by the statutory
definition of “whistleblower” in subsection 21F(a)(6), or
did they expect employees to be protected by subdivision
(iii) whenever they report violations internally, without
reporting to the Commission?12 The texts leave the matter
unclear, and no legislative history even hints at an answer.
11 Subdivision (iii) mentions the Commission only to
provide that the protection of (iii) extends to Sarbanes-
Oxley disclosures required by any “law, rule, or regulation
subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission.” 15 U.S.C.
§ 78u-6(h)(1)(A)(iii).
12 Or, to put the matter another way, did the conferees
deliberately decide to insert subdivision (iii) in
subsection 21F(h)(1)(A), knowing it would arguably be
subject to the subsection 21F(a)(6) definition of
“whistleblower,” rather than add the text of subdivision
(iii) elsewhere so that it would not even arguably be
subject to that definition?
27
http:neither.11
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page28
of 29
44. Ultimately, we think it doubtful that the conferees who
accepted the last-minute insertion of subdivision (iii)
would have expected it to have the extremely limited scope
it would have if it were restricted by the Commission
reporting requirement in the “whistleblower” definition in
subsection 21F(a)(6). If we had to choose between reading
the statute literally or broadly to carry out its apparent
purpose, we might well favor the latter course. However, we
need not definitively construe the statute, because, at a
minimum, the tension between the definition in subsection
21F(a)(6) and the limited protection provided by subdivision
(iii) of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A) if it is subject to that
definition renders section 21F as a whole sufficiently
ambiguous to oblige us to give Chevron deference to the
reasonable interpretation of the agency charged with
administering the statute. Unlike the situation confronting
the Supreme Court in King, where the agency administering
the disputed provision, the Internal Revenue Service, was
45. deemed to lack relevant expertise, King, 135 S. Ct. at 2489,
obliging the Court itself to resolve the ambiguity, see id.,
the SEC is clearly the agency to resolve the ambiguity we
face. Therefore, also unlike King, we need not resolve the
28
Case 14-4626, Document 141-1, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page29
of 29
ambiguity ourselves, but will defer to the reasonable
interpretive rule adopted by the appropriate agency.
Under SEC Rule 21F-2(b)(1), Berman is entitled to
pursue Dodd-Frank remedies for alleged retaliation after his
report of wrongdoing to his employer, despite not having
reported to the Commission before his termination. We
therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings. On
remand, the District Court will have an opportunity to
consider the R&R’s recommendation to dismiss, without
prejudice to amendment, for lack of a sufficient allegation
46. of a termination entitled to Dodd-Frank protection, and any
other arguments made by the Defendants in support of their
motion to dismiss.
Reversed and remanded.
29
Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page1 of
13
DENNIS JACOBS, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
The majority and the Securities and Exchange Commission
47. (“SEC”) have
altered a federal statute by deleting three words (“to the
Commission”) from the
definition of “whistleblower” in the Dodd‐Frank Act. No doubt,
my colleagues
in the majority, assisted by the SEC or not, could improve many
federal statutes
by tightening them or loosening them, or recasting or rewriting
them. I could try
my hand at it. But our obligation is to apply congressional
statutes as written. In
this instance, the alteration creates a circuit split, and places us
firmly on the
wrong side of it. See Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), LLC, 720
F.3d 620 (5th Cir.
2013). I respectfully dissent.
I
Persons who report certain violations of the securities laws are
protected
from retaliation under (at least) two federal statutes.
Sarbanes‐Oxley protects
employees who blow a whistle to management or to regulatory
agencies; Dodd‐
48. Frank protects “whistleblowers,” defined as persons who report
violations “to
the Commission.” 15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(a)(6). Dodd‐Frank has a
longer statute of
limitations, doubles the collectible back‐pay, and requires no
administrative
1
CERTIFIED COPY ISSUED ON 09/10/2015
Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page2 of
13
49. exhaustion. The plaintiff in this case reported the violation to
his employer, and
did not report it “to the [Securities and Exchange]
Commission,” id., and he is
therefore protected from retaliation under Sarbanes‐Oxley only.
But the SEC and
the majority perceive a hole in coverage, or an insufficiency of
remedy, and are
patching.
The statutory provisions relevant to this case are few. The
Dodd‐Frank Act
defines the word “whistleblower” in one sentence, and provides
that this
definition “shall apply” anywhere else “[i]n this section”:
(a) Definitions
In this section the following definitions shall apply:
[...]
(6) Whistleblower
The term “whistleblower” means any individual who provides,
or 2
or more individuals acting jointly who provide, information
relating
50. to a violation of the securities laws to the [Securities and
Exchange]
Commission, in a manner established, by rule or regulation, by
the
Commission.
15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(a)(6). “This definition, standing alone,
expressly and
unambiguously requires that an individual provide information
to the SEC to
qualify as a ‘whistleblower’ for purposes of § 78u‐6.” Asadi,
720 F.3d at 623. A
2
51. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page3 of
13
definition is one of the “prominent manner[s]” for limiting the
meaning of
statutory text. King v. Burwell, 135 S. Ct. 2480, 2495 (2015);
see also United States
v. DiCristina, 726 F.3d 92, 99 (2d Cir. 2013) (quoting Groman
v. IRS, 302 U.S. 82,
86 (1937) (“When an exclusive definition is intended the words
‘means’ is
employed.”)).
Later, within the same statutory section, in a provision titled
“Protection of
whistleblowers,” Dodd‐Frank creates a private cause of action
for
“whistleblowers”:
(h) Protection of whistleblowers
(1) Prohibition against retaliation
(A) In general
No employer may discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass,
directly or indirectly, or in any other manner discriminate
against, a
52. whistleblower in the terms and conditions of employment
because of
any lawful act done by the whistleblower‐‐
(i) in providing information to the Commission in accordance
with this section;
(ii) in initiating, testifying in, or assisting in any investigation
or judicial or administrative action of the Commission based
upon or related to such information; or
3
53. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page4 of
13
(iii) in making disclosures that are required or protected under
the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.), this
chapter, including section 78j‐1(m) of this title, section 1513(e)
of Title 18, and any other law, rule, or regulation subject to the
jurisdiction of the Commission.
15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(h)(1)(A)(emphases added).
Reading the definition and the substantive provision together
“clearly
answers two questions: (1) who is protected; and (2) what
actions by protected
individuals constitute protected activity.” Asadi, 720 F.3d at
625. As the Fifth
Circuit put it, “the answer to the first question is ‘a
whistleblower.’” Id. (quoting
15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(h)(1)(A) (“No employer may discharge . . . a
whistleblower . . . .”
(emphasis added))). And, just as easy, “the answer to the latter
question is ‘any
lawful act done by the whistleblower’ that falls within one of
the three categories
of action described in the statute.” Id. (quoting 15 U.S.C. §
78u‐6(h)(1)(A)).
Berman alleges that he made “disclosures that are required or
54. protected
under the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002,” 15 U.S.C. §
78u‐6(h)(1)(A)‐‐in particular,
he alleges that he reported a securities law violation to his
employer. But he does
not allege facts that make him a “whistleblower” as that term is
defined in Dodd‐
Frank. Nor could he‐‐he concedes that before his termination,
he never reported
anything “to the [Securities and Exchange] Commission.” 15
U.S.C. § 78u‐6(a)(6).
4
55. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page5 of
13
II
The majority hardly disputes that my reading (and the reading
given in
Asadi) is the more natural reading of the statute. But the
majority extends
deference to an SEC regulation that alters the unambiguous
definition of
“whistleblower” to include anyone who reports a securities law
violation “in a
manner described in . . . 15 U.S.C. 78u‐6(h)(1)(A),” 17 C.F.R. §
240.21F‐2(b)(1),
including those who report a securities violation to their
employer only.
According to the majority, there is “arguable tension,” Maj. Op.
at 7, between the
definition and the substantive whistleblower‐protection
provisions, and that is
deemed enough for the SEC’s interpretation to survive under
Chevron. I would
apply the unambiguous statutory text.
56. A. The majority assumes its own conclusion, claiming that
“subdivision
(iii) [of 15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(h)(1)(A)] . . . purports to protect
employees from
retaliation for making reports required or protected by
Sarbanes‐Oxley”. Maj.
Op. at 25 (emphasis added). That is a bad misreading,
tantamount to a
misquotation. Dodd‐Frank’s whistleblower‐protection
provisions do not
mention this (generic) employee. Instead, the statute lists three
ways that “a
whistleblower” may take protected activity (in one case, by
making disclosures
5
57. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page6 of
13
protected under Sarbanes‐Oxley, see 15 U.S.C. §
78u‐6(h)(1)(A)(iii)). And
“whistleblower” is a defined term. So subdivision (iii) only
protects someone
who (1) makes a protected disclosure under Sarbanes‐Oxley,
and (2) also satisfies
Dodd‐Frank’s definition of “whistleblower.” If the statute used
the word
“employee[],” Maj. Op. at 25, Berman might have a claim. He
does not because
the phrasing is a coinage of the majority.
The majority asks: “Who but ‘employees’ could be
discriminated against
by an ‘employer’ in the terms and conditions of ‘employment?’”
Maj. Op. at 25
n.9. My answer? A whistleblower. (Congress apparently agrees.
58. See 15 U.S.C.
§ 78u‐6(h)(1)(A) (“No employer may . . . discriminate against[]
a whistleblower in
the terms and conditions of employment . . . .”).)
The (generic) “employee” is nevertheless protected: in the
Sarbanes‐Oxley
whistleblower‐protection provision. See 18 U.S.C. § 1514A(a)
(a publicly‐traded
company may not “discriminate against an employee” because
of lawful
whistleblowing activity) (emphasis added). The majority
ignores the distinction
Congress drew in the two statutes.
B. The majority claims repeatedly that “the issue presented is
whether the
‘whistleblower’ definition in subsection 21F(a)(6) of
Dodd‐Frank applies to
6
59. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page7 of
13
subdivision (iii) of subsection 21F(h)(1)(A).” Maj. Op. at 7; see
also id. at 15‐16.
To answer that question, the majority looks here, there and
everywhere‐‐except
to the statutory text. But the definitions section is unambiguous:
“In this section
the following definitions shall apply.” 15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(a)
(emphasis added).
And all of the relevant statutory provisions in this case appear
“[i]n this
section”‐‐that is, section 78u‐6 of title 15 of the U.S. Code.
Accordingly, when
Congress used the word “whistleblower” in 15 U.S.C.
60. 78u‐6(h)(1)(A), it “mean[t]
any individual who provides . . . information relating to a
violation of the
securities laws to the Commission.” 15 U.S.C. § 78u‐6(a)(6).
The thing about a definition is that it is, well, definitional.
C. What appears to animate the majority’s finding of “arguable
tension” is
that the natural reading of the statutory text would leave 15
U.S.C.
§ 78u‐6(h)(1)(A)(iii) with “extremely limited scope,” Maj. Op.
at 17, affording
incremental protection only for individuals who suffer
retaliation for reporting to
their employer after having already made a report to the SEC.
But the majority
simply assumes that this would be a “rare example,” Maj. Op. at
20, because the
two reports would have to be “simultaneous,” Maj. Op. at 16, or
at least “nearly
simultaneous,” Maj. Op. at 20, and that, because simultaneity
would be so rare,
7
61. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page8 of
13
Congress could not have bothered its head over it. The majority
does not explain
why simultaneous reporting is required. I cannot see why it
would be.
Moreover, someone might well fire off complaints of illegal
activity more or less
at once to one or more of everyone and anyone who might
listen: corporate
officers or directors, the SEC, the newspaper, a prosecutor,
62. members of Congress,
and so on.
In any event, the majority has no support for the proposition
that when a
plain reading of a statutory provision gives it an “extremely
limited” effect, the
statutory provision is impaired or ambiguous. The U.S. Code is
full of statutory
provisions with “extremely limited” effect; there is no canon
that counsels
reinforcement of any sub‐sub‐sub‐subsection that lacks a
paradigm‐shift.1 The
majority is thrown back on what it calls euphemistically “the
realities of the
legislative process.” Maj. Op. at 27. By that, it is suggested that
Congress is too
The majority properly disclaims reliance on the absurdity
canon, see Maj.
Op. at 14, presumably recognizing that there is nothing absurd
about a plain
reading of the whistleblower definition in Dodd‐Frank. Compare
Church of the
Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S. 457, 460 (1892) (“If a
literal construction of
the words of a statute be absurd, the act must be so construed as
to avoid the
absurdity.”).
63. 8
1
2
Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page9 of
13
busy or confused to draft wording that achieves goals consistent
with the intent
64. of the SEC.2
D. The majority observes that the statutory text as written gives
“little, if
any” protection to lawyers who report violations to employers
only, or do so
first‐‐and who may be required to do so. Maj. Op. at 20. As the
majority
explains, lawyers and auditors are subject to a web of statutory,
contractual, and
ethical obligations that impact the timing and manner in which
they report
violations, whether to employers or to regulatory agencies or to
prosecutors.
Sometimes these obligations require disclosure; sometimes they
require
confidentiality. Congress may well have considered that
additional incentives
should not be offered to get lawyers and auditors to fulfill
existing professional
duties, for the same reason reward posters often specify that the
police are
ineligible.
The regulation at issue reflects the SEC’s territorial interests,
not its own
65. reading. Until only yesterday or so, a separate SEC regulation
specified the
procedures by which a Dodd‐Frank whistleblower “must” report
a violation‐‐
either by mail or fax “to the SEC Office of the Whistleblower”
in Washington,
D.C., or online through the SEC’s website. See 17 C.F.R. §
240.21F‐9(a). After oral
argument, the SEC issued an “interpretive rule” amending its
regulations to
conform to the error it has (successfully) argued here. See SEC
Release No.
34‐75592, 80 Fed. Reg. 47,829 (Aug. 10, 2015).
9
Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page10
66. of 13
III
The majority relies almost wholly on King v. Burwell, 135 S.
Ct. 2480
(2015). That case does not do the work the majority needs done.
A. King v. Burwell is not a wholesale revision of the Supreme
Court’s
statutory interpretation jurisprudence, which for decades past
has consistently
honored plain text over opportunistic inferences about
legislative history and
purpose. Had the Supreme Court intended an avulsive change, it
would not
have done so sub silentio. Just ten days before King v. Burwell
came down, the
Court reinforced and applied the principle that a judge’s “job is
to follow the text
even if doing so will supposedly undercut a basic objective of
the statute.” Baker
Botts LLP v. ASARCO LLC, 135 S. Ct. 2158, 2169 (2015)
(internal quotation marks
omitted); see also id. (Sotomayor, J., concurring in part and
concurring in the
67. judgment) (“Given the clarity of the statutory language, it
would be improper to
allow policy considerations to undermine the American Rule in
this case.”).
Nothing in King v. Burwell suggests that, in the fortnight that
intervened after
ASARCO, the Court repented of that holding‐‐let alone the
scores of cases
preceding ASARCO that say the same thing. See, e.g., Pavelic
& LeFlore v.
10
68. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page11
of 13
Marvel Entm’t Grp., 493 U.S. 120, 126 (1989) (“Our task is to
apply the text, not to
improve upon it.”).
B. To the extent the Supreme Court departed from the plain
statutory text
in King v. Burwell, it expressly relied on most unusual
circumstances. The Court
adapted wording to avoid what it considered the upending of a
ramified, hugely
consequential enactment: “Congress passed the Affordable Care
Act to improve
health insurance markets, not to destroy them.” 135 S. Ct. at
2496.
Here, the sole consequence of applying the statute as written is
that those
who report securities violations only to their employer will
receive statutory
protection that in the SEC’s view is sub‐optimal. They will be
protected under
Sarbanes‐Oxley, but not Dodd‐Frank‐‐that is, they will enjoy
the same protection
69. every securities whistleblower had before the passage of
Dodd‐Frank in 2010,
and more protection than any securities whistleblower had
before the passage of
Sarbanes‐Oxley in 2002. No markets collapse, no castles fall. A
shorter statute of
limitations may be inconvenient for some plaintiffs, but it does
not threaten the
entire statutory scheme. The only palpable danger lurking here
is that
bureaucrats and federal judges assume and exercise power to
redraft a statute to
give it a more respectable reach.
11
70. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page12
of 13
King v. Burwell was not animated by a perceived need to afford
greater
impact to a small phrase; to the contrary, the Court rejected the
idea that
“Congress made the viability of the entire Affordable Care Act
turn on the
ultimate ancillary provision: a sub‐sub‐sub section of the Tax
Code.” 135 S. Ct. at
2495. In rejecting that approach, the Court emphasized that
categorical guidance
as to congressional intent should better be looked for in a more
predictable
location‐‐like a definitions section:
Had Congress meant to limit tax credits to State Exchanges, it
likely
would have done so in the definition of ‘applicable taxpayer,’ or
in
some other prominent manner. It would not have used such a
71. winding path of connect‐the‐dots provisions about the amount
of the
credit.
Id.
For the purpose of the provision at issue here, Congress
expressed its
meaning in a “prominent manner”‐‐in the definitions section.
That is exactly
where the Court said one should look, and where the Court said
that Congress
should have inserted its limiting language about Affordable
Care Act subsidies if it
wanted the language interpreted strictly. In our case the
majority follows the sort
of “winding path of connect‐the‐dots provisions” that the
Supreme Court
ridiculed.
12
72. Case 14-4626, Document 141-2, 09/10/2015, 1594814, Page13
of 13
* * *
I vote to affirm. “If the statutory language is plain, we must
enforce it
according to its terms.” King v. Burwell, 135 S. Ct. at 2489.
The Court did not
mean in King v. Burwell to revisit the era when judges could
cast aside plain
statutory text just because they harbor “doubt[s]” about what
was going on in the
heads of individual “conferees” during the legislative process.
See Maj. Op. at
28.
13
14-4626141 Certified copy ISSUED - 09/10/2015, p.1141
Supporting Document - 09/10/2015, p.30