Showing 1971–1980 of 2214

• 1/29/1969

  Payment of fees for private physicians appointed under section 303 of the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act (42 U.S.C. § 3413)

  The document discusses the payment of fees for private physicians appointed under section 303 of the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act. It concludes that there is no clear appropriation for the payment of these physicians, and suggests that the Comptroller General should resolve the matter. The document presents questions regarding the availability of appropriations for this purpose, with a focus on whether the Department of Justice, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, or the courts should bear the cost of the physicians' fees. It also raises questions about the authority of the courts to compensate private physicians appointed under the Act.

  7/27/2020

• 1/24/1969

  Power of the President to withdraw a prior presidential approval of a CAB decision in a foreign air transportation case.

  The document discusses the power of the President to withdraw a prior presidential approval of a Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) decision in a foreign air transportation case. The conclusion reached is that the President may withdraw the prior approval within the time allowed for the filing of petitions for reconsideration, and perhaps at any time prior to the effective date of the certificates provided for in the CAB order. The document presents questions about the President's authority to withdraw approval, citing precedents from previous administrations and legal opinions. It also highlights the limitations on the power of the CAB to reconsider its decision and the implications for foreign air route cases.

  10/27/2020

• 1/18/1969

  Advice as to whether section 603(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2943(b), authorizes the Office of Economic Opportunity to suspend summarily assistance to a community action agency as a means of enforcing section 603(a), which ma

  The document discusses the interpretation of section 603(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act, specifically regarding the authority of the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) to enforce the Hatch Act, which prohibits political activities by employees of community action agencies. The document presents a dispute between OEO and the Civil Service Commission over the extent of OEO's authority to enforce the Hatch Act. It also raises questions about the interpretation of the language in section 603(b) and the potential constitutional implications of OEO's authority to summarily suspend assistance in cases of Hatch Act violations. The conclusion reached is that OEO's authority under section 603(b) is available equally for all violations, but the document leaves open the question of OEO's authority to require grantee agencies to discharge or discipline employees responsible for violations.

  7/27/2020

• 1/10/1969

  Memorandum of October 28, 1968, concerning "Special Statutory Provisions Governing Judicial Review."

  The document is a response to a memorandum concerning "Special Statutory Provisions Governing Judicial Review." It includes a review of formal administrative proceedings conducted under the jurisdiction of various units of the Department of Justice. The conclusions reached in the document include changes in parole and immigration hearings, the addition of the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the inclusion of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs as a new unit. The document presents questions concerning judicial review of administrative actions, as well as information on hearings related to narcotic statutes and regulations. It also offers to provide further information if needed.

  7/27/2020

• 1/9/1969

  Withheld Warren Commission Documents

  The attorney general asked the OLC to conduct a complete review of each of the Warren Commission exhibits that had not yet been released to the public. The OLC concluded that no unreleased exhibits would contribute to public understanding of the assassination, because most of the pertinent information in those exhibits was already publicly known. The OLC also recommended the continued withholding of “irrelevant material” related to the investigation, primarily because it would only had served to embarrass or possibly harm citizens who made tips that turned to have no connection with the assassination. For another group of documents that were scheduled to be re-reviewed in 1970, the OLC made “no firm recommendation” regarding the documents’ release prior to the 1970 review, and encouraged the attorney general to solicit the views of other agencies on the release of the documents. Lastly, the OLC informed the attorney general that the National Archives agreed to transfer the documents to a section of the stacks that was secured by a locked metal grill door to ensure the physical security of the documents.

  5/16/2022

• 1/8/1969

  The extent of your enforcement authority under Executive Order 11387 of January 1, 1968, Governing Certain Capital Transfers Abroad

  The document is a letter from the Assistant Attorney General to the Director of the Office of Foreign Direct Investments, discussing the enforcement authority under Executive Order 11387. The conclusions reached in the document are that the enforcement powers are supported by section 5(b) of the Act and that the Secretary of Commerce is authorized to exercise these powers. The questions presented for review include the extent of enforcement authority under section 5(b), the delegation of authority made by the President to the Secretary of Commerce, and whether the Act authorizes enforcement by civil action. The document also discusses the President's intention in delegating powers to the Secretary and the Board, as well as the authority to put into operation a compliance program.

  7/27/2020

• 11/4/1968

  Legal authority to use federal troops to quell Election Day disturbances

  This document discusses the authority to use federal troops to quell civil disturbances at the polls on Election Day. It concludes that the restriction on the use of troops at the polls, as outlined in 18 U.S.C. 592, does not limit the President's authority under 10 U.S.C. 331-334 to use federal troops in certain circumstances. The document presents questions about the effect of 18 U.S.C. 592 on the President's authority to use federal troops and provides a summary of the legislative history of the provision. It also mentions that a comprehensive examination of the legislative history is being prepared.

  5/16/2022

• 10/17/1968

  Stop and Frisk Guidelines for the D.C. Police

  This document provides guidelines for stop and frisk procedures for the D.C. Police, based on unresolved questions regarding the constitutional limitations of a police officer's power in these situations. The proposed stop guideline allows a police officer to stop, frisk, and question any person in a public place whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a felony or misdemeanor. The document also outlines the scope of questions, refusal to stop, Miranda warnings, refusal to furnish identification, refusal to answer questions, length of stop, voluntary trip to a telephone or precinct, unsatisfactory answers, and the proposed frisk guideline. The frisk guideline allows an officer to search for weapons if there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is armed and dangerous, with the sole purpose of protecting the officer and others nearby from harm.

  5/16/2022

• 4/26/1968

  Legal Authority for Using Federalized National Guard and Reserve Components of Armed Forces in Suppressing Civil Disorders at the Request of a State

  This opinion concluded that the President could federalize a state militia in response to a state request to do so based on the state’s inability to “restore law and order with all the resources at its command.” It also concluded that the President could deploy troops for a limited period of time in response to civil unrest, but could not do so permanently.

  5/16/2022

• 10/4/1967

  Use of Federal Troops to Protect Government Property and Functions at the Pentagon Against Anti-War Demonstrators

  This document discusses the legal basis for the use of Federal troops to protect property and functions of the Federal Government from interference by anti-war demonstrators. It explores two possible grounds for such use of troops: 10 U.S.C. 332 and the inherent right of the Government to use military force. The document also examines whether the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of Federal troops for these purposes. The conclusion reached is that the Act does not prohibit the proposed use of Federal troops, and there is a choice between the statutory and nonstatutory grounds for using Federal troops, depending on the circumstances. The document also emphasizes that if Federal troops are used, they should remain entirely under military command.

  5/16/2022