Showing 1061–1070 of 2202

• 7/29/1982

  [UNTITLED]

  This memorandum from Ted Olson compiles a list of reasons why Fred F. Fielding, counsel to the president, should not testify before the Senate Labor and Human Resources committee, including historical precedent and the effect of testifying on future invocations of immunity. The memo also states that the committee "has shown a propensity towards . . . efforts to embarrass the Administration" and calls the request for testimony "a sham." The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at https://justice.gov/olc/page/file/1226001/download.

  7/29/1982

• 7/24/1982

  Reimbursement for Defense Department Assistance to Civilian Law Enforcement Officials

  The Department of Defense Authorization Act of 1982 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to seek reimbursement from civilian law enforcement agencies to whom the Department provides various forms of assistance, and the Secretary of Defense may condition his Department's provision of assistance on such reimbursement. However, the Act also gives the Secretary discretion to waive a requirement of reimbursement for assistance provided under its authority. The Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. § 686 (1976), provides general authority for one agency to request assistance from another agency for an activity or operation that the requesting agency has authority to perform, and a performing agency should seek reimbursement for the actual cost of services provided under that Act. However, where there is specific authonty for one agency to assist another, the provisions of the Economy Act do not apply. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23106/download.

  7/24/1982

• 7/23/1982

  Department of Justice Representation of Federal Employees in Fair Employment Suits

  Government attorneys are not prohibited by 18 U.S.C. § 205 from representing federal employees in judicial personnel administration proceedings, as long as the representation is uncompensated and is not inconsistent with the attorney's performance of his or her official duties. However, Department of Justice regulations prohibit departmental attorneys from representing federal employees in fair employment suits in federal court, explicitly limiting such representation to administrative complaint procedures. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23101/download.

  7/23/1982

• 7/23/1982

  Congressional Demand for Depositicn of Counsel to the President Fred F. Fielding

  This opinion concludes that the White House Counsel has a privilege not to testify to any matters relating to his official duties in response to a congressional demand for information. The opinion further concludes that agreeing to testify in response to "this particular Congressional demand" could "erode a central foundation of Executive privilege and severely chill internal deliberations." The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at https://www.justice.gov/olc/page/file/1225996/download.

  7/23/1982

• 7/19/1982

  Importation of Morphine Sulfate for Placement in the National Defense Stockpile

  The Attorney General may authorize the General Services Administration to import morphine sulfate from Turkey for placement in the National Defense Stockpile under an exception in 21 U.S.C. § 952(a)(2)(A), if he determines that acquisition by import is necessary due to an emergency in which domestic supplies are inadequate to meet a legitimate need of the United States. A reasonable argument can be made that the prohibition in 21 U.S.C. § 952(a) does not apply to the importation of drugs by the United States, notwithstanding long-standing and consistent administrative practice and interpretation to the contrary. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23096/download.

  7/19/1982

• 7/15/1982

  Committee Approval Provision in the Simpson-Mazzoli Immigration Bill

  The provision in the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration bill, which gives the House and Senate Judiciary Committees power to dispense with certain otherwise applicable statutory requirements for an employment eligibility system, is unconstitutional, whether viewed as allowing a congressional committee to exercise delegated executive power, or as authorizing a legislative act without the necessary requirements of bicameralism and presentation to the President. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23091/download.

  7/15/1982

• 7/14/1982

  Questions Raised by the Attorney General's Service as a Trustee of the National Thist for Historic Preservation

  No conflict of interest or breach of fiduciary duty is created where the Attorney General is responsible for defending a suit brought against the Army Corps of Engineers by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, on whose Board of Trustees he serves, by statute, as an ex officio member. As an ex officio trustee, the Attorney General is always presumed to be representing the interests of the United States, especially in those situations in which the interests of the Trust and those of the United States conflict, so that no question of divided loyalty arises. While the Attorney General is authorized to participate in litigation involving the National Trust if he considers it to be in the interests of the United States, the National Trust is not a federal agency such that the Attorney General has the authonty to supervise and control all litigation to which the Trust is a party. The terms "officer, director, or trustee" in 18 U.S.C. § 208 do not include an ex officio member of an essentially private body, whose service in that body derives only from an office of public trust. While a trustee ordinarily owes a duty of loyalty to the beneficiaries of the trust, that requirement may be altered by the terms of the trust, in this case the statute which established the Trust and which made the Attorney General an ex officio trustee. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23086/download.

  7/14/1982

• 6/28/1982

  Acquisition of Land by the Department of the Air Force

  The requirement in 40 U.S.C. § 255 that the Attorney General review and approve the sufficiency of title to land prior to its acquisition by the government applies to all federal land acquisitions, except those specifically exempted from it, including the acquisition of land proposed by the Air Force in this case. The statutory provision which allows the Air Force to begin construction on land before its title is approved does not create an exception to the generally applicable requirement in 40 U.S.C. § 255, but is merely intended to allow military construction projects to get underway pending a determination on the validity of title. Under regulations promulgated by the Attorney General, which are binding on agencies to which he had delegated his authority to approve title, less than fee simple title may not be approved for lands on which the United States is placing permanent improvements, except where Congress has authorized a lesser estate. Even where Congress arguably authorized acquisition of a lesser estate, the Attorney General and his delegees are still responsible for determining whether the title to be acquired in a particular case is sufficient for the intended government purposes. The title proposed to be acquired from the Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners in this case—a right-of-way subject to a reversion interest—is not sufficient under Colorado law to protect the interests of the federal government where the Air Force intends to build a multimillion dollar military complex on the land. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23081/download.

  6/28/1982

• 6/23/1982

  Delegation of Authority to Approve Suspension of Securities leading on a National Market

  The President is authorized by the general delegation authority in 3 U.S.C. § 301 to delegate to the Secretary of the Treasury his authority to approve the suspension of securities trading by the Securities and Exchange Commission under § 12(k) of the Securities Act of 1934, since nothing in that section affirmatively prohibits delegation or specifically designates another officer to receive delegation of the function. Nothing in the legislative history of § 12(k) suggests that Congress expected the President to exercise his approval authority personally. Indeed, Congress may have felt it necessary to make explicit the § 12(k) approval authority at all only because of the independence otherwise given the SEC. Thus the congressional intent could have been simply to give the President the option, which he might not otherwise have enjoyed, to supervise the agency's decisions in this important area. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23076/download.

  6/23/1982

• 6/22/1982

  Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

  The provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 giving the Office of Management and Budget authority to review and approve agency "information collection requests" do not apply to reporting and recordkeeping requirements contained in agency regulations which came into existence prior to the effective date of the 1980 Act. However, new regulations containing reporting or recordkeeping requirements must be developed in accordance with the procedures set forth in 44 U S.C. § 3504(h). Section 3504(h) provides the exclusive procedure for OMB review and possible disapproval of information collection requirements contained in or specifically required by agency regulations; the more stringent procedures for OMB review set forth in 44 U.S C. §§ 3504(c) and 3507 apply only to agency information collection requests issued pursuant to or deriving from regulations. The language and history of other provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, as well as its general scheme, support the conclusion that OMB has no authority under either § 3504(h) or § 3507 to review and disapprove existing agency regulations. Nonetheless, OMB is given substantial authority over existing regulations by other provisions of the Act, including § 3504(b). The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/23071/download.

  6/22/1982