TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U.S. 19, 20 (2001)

Page:   Index   Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

38

TRW INC. v. ANDREWS

Scalia, J., concurring in judgment

of the law that cries out for application of a discovery rule," ante, at 28. These cries, however, are properly directed not to us, but to Congress, whose job it is to decide how "hu-mane" legislation should be—or (to put the point less tendentiously) to strike the balance between remediation of all injuries and a policy of repose. See Amy v. Watertown (No. 2), 130 U. S. 320, 323-324 (1889) ("[T]he cases in which [the statute of limitations may be suspended by causes not mentioned in the statute itself] are very limited in character, and are to be admitted with great caution; otherwise the court would make the law instead of administering it").

Congress has been operating against the background rule recognized in Bay Area Laundry for a very long time. When it has wanted us to apply a different rule, such as the injury-discovery rule, it has said so. See, e. g., 18 U. S. C. § 1030(g) (1994 ed., Supp. V).3 See also, e. g., 15 U. S. C. § 77m (1994 ed., Supp. V); 4 42 U. S. C. § 9612(d)(2) (1994 ed.).5 To apply a new background rule to previously enacted legislation would reverse prior congressional judgments; and to display uncertainty regarding the current background rule makes all unspecifying new legislation a roll of the dice. Today's opinion, in clarifying the meaning of 15 U. S. C. § 1681p, casts the meaning of innumerable other limitation periods in doubt.

3 "No action may be brought under this subsection unless such action is begun within 2 years of the date of the act complained of or the date of the discovery of the damage."

4 "No action shall be maintained to enforce any liability created under section 77k or 77l(a)(2) of this title unless brought within one year after the discovery of the untrue statement or the omission, or after such discovery should have been made by the exercise of reasonable diligence, or, if the action is to enforce a liability created under section 77l(a)(1) of this title, unless brought within one year after the violation upon which it is based."

5 "No claim may be presented under this section . . . unless the claim is presented within 3 years after . . . [t]he date of the discovery of the loss and its connection with the release in question."

Page:   Index   Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007