Showing 1981–1990 of 2214

• 10/3/1967

  Carriage of Firearms by the Marshal, Deputy Marshals, and Judges of the Customs Court

  The Marshal and Deputy Marshals of the Customs Court are not authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3053 to carry firearms. Neither the official duties of the Marshal, as described by 28 U.S.C. § 872 and Rule 19 of the Rules of the Customs Court, nor the official duties of the Judges of the Customs Court would appear to necessitate the carriage of firearms. If the Customs Court finds it necessary to rely solely on its Marshal to police its quarters, it would probably have inherent authority to authorize the Marshal and Deputies to carry arms; however, there would be no basis for assuming inherent authority in the Court to authorize possession of arms by its Judges. A state could not constitutionally require a federal official whose duties necessitate carrying firearms to obtain a firearms license. 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/20806/download.

  10/3/1967

• 6/20/1967

  Voluntary legal services to the poor

  This document is a memorandum addressed to all attorneys in the Department of Justice, encouraging them to provide voluntary legal services to the poor. It outlines the opportunities available for attorneys to engage in programs for legal assistance and the limitations they should be aware of. The conclusion reached in the document is that attorneys in the Department of Justice have the opportunity to participate in voluntary legal service programs for the needy, and they are encouraged to take advantage of these opportunities. The document also presents questions for review, such as whether attorneys in the Department of Justice will wish to engage in legal assistance programs for the poor, and it provides references to relevant regulations and opinions for further guidance.

  5/16/2022

• 5/26/1967

  Available legal action to prevent importation of the Soviet magazine Sputnik

  This opinion assessed the legal options available to prevent importation of Sputnik, an English-language magazine written in the Soviet Union but printed in Finland. The OLC advised that the importation of Sputnik likely did not fall within penal forfeiture laws, agreeing with the State Department and disagreeing with the U.S. Information Agency. The OLC also assessed whether a presidential proclamation barring Sputnik’s importation or assessing additional duties on it would violate trade treaties between the United States and Finland, and considered whether new legislation could be easily passed to prohibit importation of materials outside a formal cultural exchange agreement. In describing the First Amendment concerns that might arise, the OLC noted that both the magazine’s distributors and readers might lodge a First Amendment complaint. Ultimately, the OLC concluded that a constitutional challenge would be unlikely to succeed if the government described the importation controls as “designed primarily to [e]nsure reciprocity in the exchange of ideas” rather than “to prevent or diminish the flow of printed materials into the United States based on its contents.”

  5/16/2022

• 1/31/1967

  Executive Order 10501

  This memo examined whether the language of Exectuive Order 10501 should be altered to avoid the disclosure of sensitive defense information under the newly-enacted Freedom of Information Act.

  5/16/2022

• 11/8/1966

  Warren Commission ‐‐ autopsy notes

  This memo describes the process taken in developing the autopsy report of President Kennedy following his assassination. The OLC noted that the only pertinent testimony was that of Dr. Humes, the physician who drafted the autopsy report.

  5/16/2022

• 10/28/1966

  Warren Commission Exhibits

  The OLC explained that, when a list of exhibits referred to in the Warren Commission report was published, there would be gaps in the sequence of the FBI exhibit numbers. These gaps were largely attributable to the Commission's attempt to avoid duplication by omitting FBI exhibits that were later given Warren Commission exhibit numbers. To avoid speculation that the gaps mean that there are missing exhibits, the OLC advised the FBI to prepare a list to document the disposition of each of the FBI exhibit numbers.

  5/16/2022

• 10/24/1966

  Effect of the new "Public Records Statute" upon the public availability of items given to the United States and placed in the Archives under section 6(d) of the Federal Records Act of 1950

  The OLC was asked to analyze provisions of the newly passed Freedom of Information Act. After analyzing the meaning of the words “record” and “historical materials” under the provisions in question, the agency noted that “it would appear arguable” that FOIA “applies only to papers, reports, photographs and not to objects such as a desk.” The OLC also concluded that since 44 U.S.C. § 397(e) “specifically authorizes the acceptance of papers and others historical materials subject to restriction as to their usage, the items in question [were] specifically exempted from disclosure ” under FOIA Exemption 3.

  5/16/2022

• 8/24/1966

  Redistricting of California

  This memo examined proposed orders from the Southern District of Califonia detailing the venue for preexisting cases once the redistricting of California’s federal courts was accomplished. The OLC found the proposed order for civil cases to be appropriate, but it presented a series of recommendations with respect to criminal cases.

  5/16/2022

• 8/17/1966

  The authority and procedures for releasing for public disclosure certain of the documentary material that was produced or acquired by the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy (the Warren Commission)

  The Archivist of the United States and the Deputy Administrator of General Services asked the OLC for guidance on releasing documents produced or provided to the Warren Commission in connection with its investigation into President Kennedy’s assassination. The OLC noted that because the Warren Commission no longer existed and had transferred all of its records, papers, and other documentary material to the National Archives, the National Archives had the authority to review the material and to determine what should be disclosed to the public. The OLC also suggested that the National Archives conduct subsequent reviews of withheld material until it would eventually all be released.

  5/16/2022

• 2/14/1966

  Federal Action to Restore Civil and Political Rights to Convicted Persons

  This memo examined how the federal government might restore the civil and political rights of convicted persons. It found that while the federal government could remove many disqualifications imposed by federal law, the government likely could not offer an amnestied offender a full restoration of the rights of state citizenship. It further recommended that any action be limited to first offenders showing evidence of rehabilitation.

  5/16/2022