U.S. Code » Title 1 » Chapter CHAPTER 3— CODE OF LAWS OF UNITED STATES AND SUPPLEMENTS; DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE AND SUPPLEMENTS

1 U.S.C. § 202

Preparation and publication of Codes and Supplements

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 1 CasesGoogle Scholar
There shall be prepared and published under the supervision of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives—(a) Cumulative Supplements to Code of Laws of United States for each session of Congress.—A supplement for each session of the Congress to the then current edition of the Code of Laws of the United States, cumulatively embracing the legislation of the then current supplement, and correcting errors in such edition and supplement;(b) Cumulative Supplement to District of Columbia Code for each session of Congress.—A supplement for each session of the Congress to the then current edition of the Code of the District of Columbia, cumulatively embracing the legislation of the then current supplement, and correcting errors in such edition and supplement;(c) New editions of Codes and Supplements.—New editions of the Code of Laws of the United States and of the Code of the District of Columbia, correcting errors and incorporating the then current supplement. In the case of each code new editions shall not be published oftener than once in each five years. Copies of each such edition shall be distributed in the same manner as provided in the case of supplements to the code of which it is a new edition. Supplements published after any new edition shall not contain the legislation of supplements published before such new edition.(July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 637.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesCross References

Council of the District of Columbia, functions respecting, see section 2 of Pub. L. 94–386, Aug. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1170, set out as a note under section 285b of Title 2, The Congress.

Office of the Law Revision Counsel, functions respecting preparation, revision, publication, etc., see section 285b of Title 2.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2023 · leading case: Mangum v. Action Collection Serv., Inc., 575 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mangum v. Action Collection Serv., Inc., 575 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “" There is also a House of Representatives report, but it merely sets out the statutory language and, thus, affords no insights.”
Vote.Org v. Paxton, 89 F.4th 459 (5th Cir. 2023). “42 (citing 1 U.S.C. § 202 (c)). In the 1934, 1940, and 1946 Codes, the then-sole section of this key statute was in the Code title for “Aliens and Citizenship” or “Aliens and Nationality” as 8 U.”
Nashville Milk Co. v. Carnation Co., 355 U.S. 373 (1958). · cites it 2× “1 U. S. C. § 202 . That Committee construed § 3 of the Robinson-Patman Act as part of the antitrust laws, for it gave the section number 13a in the Code and provided in § 12 that the term "antitrust laws" "includes sections 1-27 of this title.”
Young v. Internal Revenue Serv., 596 F. Supp. 141 (N.D. Ind. 1984). “1, which was then denominated as Title 26 by the House Judiciary Committee pursuant to 1 U.S.C. § 202 (a). Finally, even if Title 26 was not itself enacted into positive law, that does not mean that the laws under that title are null and void.”
United States v. Eilberg, 507 F. Supp. 267 (E.D. Pa. 1980). “” Subsequent to the enactment of Section 57, which vested authority over House allowances in the Committee on House Administration, the United States Code-which is published under the authority of the House of Representatives’ Judiciary Com *281 mittee, 1 U.S.C. § 202…”
Dist. of Columbia v. Allen Berenter, Allen Berenter v. Dist. of Columbia, 466 F.2d 367 (D.C. Cir. 1972). “Code 4 ; rather, it was compiled pursuant to 1 U.S.C. § 202 (1970). The Codifier’s notes explain the basis for section 47-2405’s compilation: The five paragraphs of this section comprise, respectively, the last sentences of subsecs, (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of section 5 of…”
Camarie Mangum v. Action Collection Serv., Inc (9th Cir. 2009). “See H.R. Rep. No. 95-131, at 15, 23 (1997).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.