at 291 n. 5 (emphasis in original). The Technical Amendments answer this question. Congress added the “on, before, or after” language to the effective date provision accompanying the 1990 revision of § 1105a(a)(3). See Technical Amendments § 306(a)(11) (amending § 513(b) of IM-MACT). Ignacio maintains that § 306(a)(11) of the Technical Amendments was not intended to preclude aggravated felons from obtaining an automatic stay if their convictions predated the passage of the ADAA. We disagree. The insertion of the “on, before, or after” language demonstrates a clear intent to bar from an automatic stay those aliens whose convictions fall under the definition of “aggravated felony,” regardless of the date of those convictions. Cf. United States v. Koziel, 954 F.2d 831, 833, (2d Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Bodre, 948 F.2d 28, 35 (1st
holding that the act is retroactive holding that the act is not retroactive holding that on before or after language in immact  505b gives provision eliminating judicial recommendations against deportation full retroactive effect holding retroactive application holding no retroactive application