U.S. Code » Title 4 » Chapter CHAPTER 4— THE STATES

4 U.S.C. § 125

Nonseverability

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 4 CasesGoogle Scholar
If a court of competent jurisdiction enters a final judgment on the merits that—(1) is based on Federal law;(2) is no longer subject to appeal; and(3) substantially limits or impairs the essential elements of sections 116 through 126 of this title,then sections 116 through 126 of this title are invalid and have no legal effect as of the date of entry of such judgment.(Added Pub. L. 106–252, § 2(a), July 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 632.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date; Application of Amendment

Section effective July 28, 2000, and applicable only to customer bills issued after the first day of the first month beginning more than 2 years after July 28, 2000, see section 3 of Pub. L. 106–252, set out as a note under section 116 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2021–2021 · leading case: Collins v. Yellen, 594 U.S. 220 (2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Collins v. Yellen, 594 U.S. 220 (2021). “Contra, 4 U. S. C. §125 (inseverability clause). Nor does it contain any fallback provision stating that §4617(b)(2)(j)(ii) should be altered if the removal clause is found unlawful.”
Collins v. Yellen, 594 U.S. 220 (2021). “Contra, 4 U. S. C. §125 (inseverability clause). Nor does it contain any fallback provision stating that §4617(b)(2)(j)(ii) should be altered if the removal clause is found unlawful.”
Collins v. Yellen, 594 U.S. 220 (2021). “Contra, 4 U. S. C. §125 (inseverability clause). Nor does it contain any fallback provision stating that §4617(b)(2)(j)(ii) should be altered if the removal clause is found unlawful.”
Collins v. Yellen (2021). “Contra, 4 U. S. C. §125 (inseverability clause). Nor does it contain any fallback provision stating that §4617(b)(2)(j)(ii) should be altered if the removal clause is found unlawful.”
Collins v. Yellen (2021). “Contra, 4 U. S. C. §125 (inseverability clause). Nor does it contain any fallback provision stating that §4617(b)(2)(j)(ii) should be altered if the removal clause is found unlawful.”
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.