Cornell Law website omits 12 USC 95a

[Soulution]

Spoke to them, and supposedly the omission is per editorial action of the Law Revision Council due to being redundant with another portion of the code.

The reason why Law Cornell and the gov website both have 12 U.S.C. § 95a omitted is not done with malicious intent like fraud via omission. What Gavilan said (quoted above) was correct: 12 U.S.C. § 95a has been omitted due to redundancy. The statute is now found at 50 U.S.C. § 4305(b)2

The language of 50 U.S.C. § 4305 is the same except this version says "subdivision" whereas 12 U.S.C. § 95a says "section":

(2)Any payment, conveyance, transfer, assignment, or delivery of property or interest therein, made to or for the account of the United States, or as otherwise directed, pursuant to this subdivision or any rule, regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder shall to the extent thereof be a full acquittance and discharge for all purposes of the obligation of the person making the same; and no person shall be held liable in any court for or in respect to anything done or omitted in good faith in connection with the administration of, or in pursuance of and in reliance on, this subdivision, or any rule, regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder.

I was looking into this at a law library a couple months ago, and was reading some case law on the issue (I'll have to find the specific cases again, and will post them then) and found that the use of the original statute - 12 U.S.C. § 95a - is no longer recognized by the court as having authority. The courts no longer recognizing the statute as having authority along with the aforementioned reason of redundancy is why 12 U.S.C. § 95a has since been omitted.