Showing 1781–1790 of 2214

• 7/8/1974

  Effect of 1974 Supreme Court Decisions (Wheeler and Marburger) on Federal Aid to Parochial Schools [includes follow-up memorandum explaining typographical error]

  The document is a memorandum discussing the effects of the 1974 Supreme Court decisions on federal aid to parochial schools. The conclusions reached in the document are that the new rulings do not signal a relaxation of the ban against government aid to sectarian schools. The document presents a detailed analysis of the Court's decisions and implications of the Wheeler v. Barrera and Marburger v. Public Funds for Public Schools of New Jersey cases. The questions presented for review include the constitutionality of government aid to sectarian schools, the potential relaxation of the Establishment Clause prohibitions, and the implications of government aid to sectarian schools.

  4/28/2020

• 7/5/1974

  Federal Salary Act of 1967

  The document is a response to a request for an analysis of the Federal Salary Act of 1967, specifically regarding the President's power to invoke the Act to propose a pay increase. The conclusion reached is that the President does not have the power to do so. The document also presents questions about the appointment and terms of the Commission on Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Salaries, as well as the timing of the President's recommendations and the potential for resubmitting recommendations in 1975. It also discusses the President's submission of legislation to raise the Executive pay schedule.

  4/28/2020

• 7/4/1974

  Request for Application of Executive Privilege (Messrs. Sonnenfeldt, Sutterlin).

  The document is a memorandum regarding the request for the application of executive privilege for two State Department employees. The conclusion reached in the document is that the President should invoke executive privilege and direct the withholding of information from the House Committee on Internal Security. The questions presented for review include the request for the application of executive privilege, the withholding of information from the loyalty-security files of the two State Department employees, and the proposed request addressed to the Acting Counsel to the President.

  4/28/2020

• 7/3/1974

  Obligations of the Federal Financing Bank.

  The document is a response to a request for an opinion on whether obligations issued by the Federal Financing Bank will be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The conclusion reached in the document is that the obligations of the Bank will be general obligations of the United States backed by its full faith and credit. The questions presented for review include the authorization for the Bank to issue obligations to the public, the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase such obligations, and the pledge of the full faith and credit of the United States to the obligations issued by the Bank.

  4/28/2020

• 7/2/1974

  Hatch Act and revenue sharing

  The document discusses the Hatch Act and revenue sharing, and includes a statement issued by Senator Long, Senator, Bennett, Congressman Mills, and Congressman Schneebell on June 28, 1974. It also addresses the legal issues surrounding the Revenue Sharing Act and concludes that the legislative history does not support the conclusion that the Hatch Act is inapplicable to recipients of revenue sharing payments. The document also mentions a draft memorandum sent to Mr. Schmults on July 2, which was discussed with Leon Ulman and Dave Marblestone on June 28. The questions presented for review include the applicability of the Hatch Act to recipients of revenue sharing payments and the determinative nature of post-Act statements made by members of Congress.

  4/28/2020

• 6/28/1974

  Authority of the Small Business Administration over the membership practices of ethnic fraternal organizations receiving disaster loans.

  The document is a response to a letter from the Honorable Thomas S. Kleppe regarding the Small Business Administration's authority over the membership practices of fraternal organizations receiving disaster loans. The conclusion reached in the document is that disaster loans to such organizations are subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the SBA regulation properly prohibits covered organizations from denying membership solely on the basis of national origin. The document presents questions regarding the applicability of Title VI and part 113 regulations to disaster loans received by fraternal organizations, as well as the need for amending the SBA Title VI regulation to explicitly include disaster loans to organizations not listed in the regulation.

  4/28/2020

• 6/27/1974

  Continuation of Employee Benefits for Corporate Personnel Performing Advanceman Functions

  The document is a memorandum discussing the continuation of employee benefits for corporate personnel performing advancement functions. It explores the implications of appointing an individual as either a special government employee or a regular government employee, and the conflict-of-interest aspects associated with each appointment. The conclusion reached is that if the individual is appointed as a special government employee, they may receive a stipend from their former employer and other company-provided benefits. If appointed as a regular government employee, the receipt of a stipend and other benefits is contingent on whether they are being paid by an outside source in supplementation of their government compensation. The document also highlights the Standards of Conduct applicable to employees in the Executive Office of the President, emphasizing the prohibition of outside activities that may result in a conflict of interest. The questions presented for review include the determination of the individual's appointment status and the implications of receiving benefits from an outside source.

  4/28/2020

• 6/27/1974

  Department Policy on Individual Honoraria or other Forms of Compensation from Private Persons or Groups

  The document discusses the Department's policy on individual honoraria or other forms of compensation from private persons or groups. It addresses the need for clarification of current regulations and the applicability of honoraria for Presidential appointees. The conclusions reached in the document include the need for a clarification of current regulations and the recognition that Presidential appointees have a private life and may receive honoraria for speeches or lectures that do not conflict with their official duties. The questions presented for review include the need for new regulations or a clarification of current regulations, as well as the applicability of honoraria for Presidential appointees and the language used in the Department's regulation.

  4/28/2020

• 6/21/1974

  Federal Advisory Committee Act - applicability to ABA Committee on Federal Judiciary

  The document discusses the applicability of the Federal Advisory Committee Act to the ABA Committee on Federal Judiciary. It presents the views of the ABA Committee and the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) on whether the ABA Committee is "utilized" by the Department of Justice, and concludes that the ABA Committee is indeed utilized by the Department for judgeship selection. The document also outlines the practical effects of coverage by the Act, such as the requirements for public notice, presence of federal employees, and open meetings, and suggests the possibility of seeking an amendment to exempt the Committee from coverage. The questions presented for review include the interpretation of "utilized," the effects of coverage by the Act, and the potential amendment of the Act.

  4/28/2020

• 6/19/1974

  President's Power to Extent in which Emergency Board under Railway Labor Act Must Submit its Report

  This document discusses the President's power to extend the time within which an Emergency Board appointed under the Railway Labor Act must submit its report. The document presents a dispute between carriers and employees, with the Emergency Board requesting an extension to submit its report, which has been recommended by the National Mediation Board. The conclusion reached is that there is no legal objection to the President's action in extending the time for the Emergency Board to submit its report, and it also raises questions about the injunctive effect of the Executive order and the ability of the parties to modify it by mutual consent. The document presents a review of the legal considerations and administrative practice surrounding the issue.

  4/28/2020