FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd. · ¶85

We have inferred legislative adoption of our holdings from far less. In Evans v. United States, 504 U. S. 255 (1992), for example, we said that the “silence of the body that is empowered to give us a ‘contrary direction’ if it does not want the [prevailing judicial interpretation] to survive is consistent with an application of the normal presumption” that Congress has accepted that interpretation. Id., at 269. In the case before us now, there is something much better than “silence”: In addition to the text and structure of the amended statute itself, we have legislative history containing an explicit statement from Congress imploring “courts to imply private rights of action under” the amended Section 47(b), and a specific reference to TAMA as an example of a judicial decision that found one fewer implied right than Congress wanted. H. R. Rep. No. 96–1341, at 28–29, and n. 6; see also…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.