U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART I— THE AGENCIES GENERALLY › Chapter CHAPTER 9— EXECUTIVE REORGANIZATION

5 U.S.C. § 907

Effect on other laws, pending legal proceedings, and unexpended appropriations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) A statute enacted, and a regulation or other action made, prescribed, issued, granted, or performed in respect of or by an agency or function affected by a reorganization under this chapter, before the effective date of the reorganization, has, except to the extent rescinded, modified, superseded, or made inapplicable by or under authority of law or by the abolition of a function, the same effect as if the reorganization had not been made. However, if the statute, regulation, or other action has vested the functions in the agency from which it is removed under the reorganization plan, the function, insofar as it is to be exercised after the plan becomes effective, shall be deemed as vested in the agency under which the function is placed by the plan.(b) For the purpose of subsection (a) of this section, “regulation or other action” means a regulation, rule, order, policy, determination, directive, authorization, permit, privilege, requirement, designation, or other action.(c) A suit, action, or other proceeding lawfully commenced by or against the head of an agency or other officer of the United States, in his official capacity or in relation to the discharge of his official duties, does not abate by reason of the taking effect of a reorganization plan under this chapter. On motion or supplemental petition filed at any time within twelve months after the reorganization plan takes effect, showing a necessity for a survival of the suit, action, or other proceeding to obtain a settlement of the questions involved, the court may allow the suit, action, or other proceeding to be maintained by or against the successor of the head or officer under the reorganization effected by the plan or, if there is no successor, against such agency or officer as the President designates.(d) The appropriations or portions of appropriations unexpended by reason of the operation of the chapter may not be used for any purpose, but shall revert to the Treasury.(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 396; Pub. L. 95–17, § 2, Apr. 6, 1977, 91 Stat. 32.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Derivation

U.S. Code

Revised Statutes and

Statutes at Large

(a)–(c)

5 U.S.C. 133z–7.

June 20, 1949, ch. 226, § 9, 63 Stat. 206.

(d)

5 U.S.C. 133z–8.

June 20, 1949, ch. 226, § 10, 63 Stat. 206.

In subsections (a) and (c), the words “the provisions of” in the phrase “under this chapter” are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (c), the words “the suit, action, or other proceeding” are substituted for “the same”.

In subsection (d), the words “shall revert” are substituted for “shall be . . . returned”, and the words “impounded and” are omitted as unnecessary.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1977—Subsecs. (a), (b). Pub. L. 95–17 reenacted subsecs. (a) and (b) without change.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 95–17 substituted “twelve months” for “12 months”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 95–17 reenacted subsec. (d) without change.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1971–1990 · leading case: United States v. Augustin Alvarez, Oscar Hernandez, Mario C. Simon, Rolando Rios, Ramon Raymond, Eduardo Portal, Victoriano Concepcion, A/K/A \Macho\"", 755 F.2d 830 (11th Cir. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Augustin Alvarez, Oscar Hernandez, Mario C. Simon, Rolando Rios, Ramon Raymond, Eduardo Portal, Victoriano Concepcion, A/K/A \Macho\"", 755 F.2d 830 (11th Cir. 1985). · cites it 6× “The situation is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 907 (a), which provides: A statute enacted, and a regulation or other action made, prescribed, issued, granted, or performed in respect of or by an agency or function affected by a reorganization under this chapter, before the effective…”
United States v. Emmett Lovell Nabors, 901 F.2d 1351 (6th Cir. 1990). · cites it 7× “See 5 U.S.C. § 907 (a). In other words, the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents step into the statutory shoes of the revenue agents for the purposes of § 1114 protection.”
United States v. Keith Stanford Irick, 497 F.2d 1369 (5th Cir. 1974). · cites it 6× “5 The district court’s memorandum and order concluding that the indictment should be dismissed omits reference to 5 U.S.C. § 907 (a), enacted September 6, 1966.”
United States v. Daniel Reid & Theodore E. Thomas, Jr., 517 F.2d 953 (2d Cir. 1975). · cites it 2× “before the effective date of the reorganization, has, except to the extent rescinded, modified, superseded, or made inapplicable by or under authority of law or by the abolition of a function, the same effect as if the reorganization had not been made.”
Dist. of Columbia v. North Washington Neighbors, Inc., 367 A.2d 143 (D.C. 1976). · cites it 2× “” 5 U.S.C. § 907 (a). 4 We must also disagree with the conclusion of the trial court that the letter of July 21, 1971, to Senator McGovern, 5 in which the District outlined its reading of the regulations relevant to repair of water pipes, was in effect “rulemaking” within the…”
United States v. Jaime Lopez, Also Known as Salvidor Lopez-Aguilar, 586 F.2d 978 (2d Cir. 1978). · cites it 3× “This situation is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 907 which provides: (a) A statute enacted, and a regulation or other action made, prescribed, issued, granted, or performed in respect of or by an agency or function affected by a reorganization under this chapter, before the effective…”
United States v. James Hillsman & Clinton Bush, 522 F.2d 454 (7th Cir. 1975). “5 U.S.C. § 907 (a) provides, in pertinent part: “A statute enacted, and a regulation or other action made, prescribed, issued, granted, or performed in respect of or by an agency or function affected by a reorganization under this chapter, before the effective date of the…”
United States v. Harrington, 524 F. Supp. 292 (E.D. Cal. 1981). · cites it 4× “3 Further, the plain language of 5 U.S.C. § 907 , discussed in greater detail, infra, undercuts the government’s primary-secondary argument.”
Harrison Wellford v. William D. Ruckelshaus, 439 F.2d 598 (D.C. Cir. 1971). “The responsibility of the Secretary of Agriculture in this connection has been transferred to the Administrator of the new Environmental Protection Agency.”
Munnelly v. United States Postal Serv., 805 F.2d 295 (8th Cir. 1986). · cites it 2× “Munnelly also argues that the Postal Service could not remove him because 5 U.S.C. § 907 (a) (1982) preserves his status as a presidential appointee.”
United States v. Harrington, 520 F. Supp. 93 (E.D. Cal. 1981). “Furthermore, such an argument would ignore the plain language of the reorganization plan, to say nothing of the purpose and effect of 5 U.S.C. § 907 (a). Section 907(a) clearly provides that when a reorganization plan transfers a statutory duty from one agency to another, the…”
Env't Def. Fund, Inc. v. Ruckelshaus, 439 F.2d 584 (D.C. Cir. 1971). “The functions of the Secretary of Agriculture under the relevant statute have been transferred to the Administrator of the new Environmental Protection Agency.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.