mr. speaker , i yield myself such time as i may consume before i yield to the gentleman from massachusetts , which i will do gladly . 
i would say to the chairman that i respect very much , and i am speaking to the gentleman from california ( chairman dreier ) , i respect very much what my good friend from california has said with reference to the rule , the amendments that are allowed . 
but i was in that same process as the chairman was in the committee on rules . 
three-quarters of the amendments that were submitted on time pursuant to the chairman 's correct direction to the body are not a part of the debate here . 
the sensenbrenner amendment , which is rather lengthy , came late to the committee . 
it is not being voted on up or down for the reason that it was made a self-executing part of the rule . 
now , the gentleman can call that fair and balanced , but let me just say to the chairman that there is a new section 105 , and many of the members are hearing this for the first time . 
it eliminates federal court review in many conventions against torture cases , and it eliminates the power of the federal appeals court judges to stay the removal of asylum seekers . 
i do not think any irony is lost on the chairman about the ninth circuit 's ruling . 
