Showing 1131–1140 of 2214

• 12/21/1981

  Authority to Pay Witness Fees to Illegal Aliens

  Aliens not legally entitled to be admitted to or reside in the United States who have been paroled for prosecution as defendants, who admit deportability, or who have been adjudged deportable under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b), are not entitled to payment for appearing as witnesses in federal courts. 28 U.S.C. § 1821(e). However, aliens who are currently the subject of deportation proceedings but have not admitted deportability, or who have rendered themselves subject to deportation proceedings and do not admit deportability, are entitled to witness fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1821 in the amount of $30 per day. Aliens determined to be excludable under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, whose removal has been stayed by the Attorney General so that they may testify on behalf of the United States or indigent criminal defendants, are entitled to witness fees in the amount of $1 per day. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(d); Rule 17(b), Fed. R. Crim. P. Where the language of two or more appropriation accounts makes them equally available to pay certain expenses, and an administrative determination has been made to pay them out of one account rather than any other, Comptroller General rulings require the continued use of the appropriation account that has been selected. Accordingly, witness fees paid to excludable aliens pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1227(d) must in the future be made from the Department of Justice's "Fees and Expenses of Witnesses" (FEW) appropriation, rather than from the Immigration and Naturalization Service appropriation, since such fees have in the past been paid from the FEW appropriation. 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/22836/download.

  12/21/1981

• 12/21/1981

  Computation of 90-Day Period for Preliminary Investigation Under the Special Prosecutor Act

  The 90-day period for the Attorney General's preliminary investigation under the Special Prosecutor provisions of the Ethics in Government Act should be computed from the day when the specific information is effectively received by the Department of Justice. In this case, the 90-day period began to run when the Attorney General himself was apprised of the allegations against the Secretary of Labor, and ordered the preliminary investigation commenced. 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/22841/download.

  12/21/1981

• 12/10/1981

  Antideficiency Act Matters

  The document is a memorandum responding to a request for comments on a draft letter and memorandum. It provides feedback on the legal arguments raised in the draft letter to Mr. Blaylock and suggests changes to the language used. The memorandum also addresses the policy issues raised in the draft memorandum for Director Stockman and requests that the document not be viewed as the Department of Justice's concurrence in its present form. The questions presented for review include the appropriateness of the language used in the draft letter, the inflexibility of the policy outlined in the draft memorandum, and the unresolved legal and policy questions.

  7/27/2020

• 12/9/1981

  United States Participation in Interpol Computerized Search File Project

  Neither state nor federal law would prohibit participation by the United States National Central Bureau of Interpol (USNCB) in a proposed computerized information exchange system, provided the USNCB complies with all disclosure, accounting, and publication requirements imposed by applicable federal statutes, such as 22 U.S.C. § 263a, the Privacy Act, and other federal restrictions on the exchange of criminal history information. As a matter of comity, the USNCB may comply with relevant state laws and regulations that restrict the disclosure and dissemination of personally identifiable information; however, under the Supremacy Clause, as a federal law enforcement agency it is not bound to do so. The requirements of the Privacy Act may affect the structure and functioning of any computerized information exchange system in which the USNCB participates, particularly insofar as it would require the USNCB to verify the accuracy of data in its records prior to disclosure. Applicable international guidelines and agreements relating to information exchange and privacy protection are broader in scope than the Privacy Act, and may restrict federal law enforcement agencies' ability to participate fully in the proposed system. Moreover, there are a number of possible international conflicts of law issues raised by the United States' participation in Interpol generally, and in any automated information exchange system it may implement. 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/22831/download.

  12/9/1981

• 12/3/1981

  The Legality of "Legislative Veto" Provisions

  The document addresses the legality of "legislative veto" provisions in the context of congressional review of agency rules. The conclusion reached is that legislative veto provisions are constitutionally infirm because they fail to conform to constitutionally prescribed procedures for legislative action and intrude on the Executive's functions in appropriations bills. The document raises questions about the implications of the testimony given before the Subcommittee on Rules of the House of the House Rules Committee and clarifies that there should not be a distinction between appropriations bills and other bills as a benchmark for determining the constitutionality of legislative veto provisions. It also offers to examine any particular measure or provision and provide specific views if needed.

  7/27/2020

• 12/2/1981

  Official Claims by the Justice Department Against Iran

  The document is a memorandum from Larry L. Simms, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, to Kevin D. Rooney, Assistant Attorney General for Administration, regarding the official claims against Iran. The document outlines the jurisdiction over official claims of the United States arising from contractual arrangements with Iran, and emphasizes the need for expedition in processing these claims before the legal deadline of January 19, 1982. The memo also suggests consulting with Peter Goldberg of the Antitrust Division and the State Department team for assistance in processing the attached claim form. The questions presented for review include the best way to fill out and process the claim form, as well as the need for consultation with Mr. Goldberg and the State Department team.

  7/27/2020

• 12/2/1981

  Illiterate Aliens Seeking Admission as Immigrants

  Illiterate aliens who would otherwise be eligible for admission to this country on visas allocated under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1152 or 1153, may not avoid the literacy requirement of 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(25) simply by virtue of their being accompanied by a child who is under the age of 16, if that child's own eligibility for admission depends upon that of his or her parents. The State Department's longstanding administrative practice in this regard finds no support in the legislative history of the literacy requirement, which establishes that Congress intended to exempt from its application only those illiterates whose close relatives were independently entitled to be admitted. 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/22826/download.

  12/2/1981

• 12/1/1981

  Assessment of Inspectional Overtime Charges at Other than Designated Ports of Entry

  The document is a memorandum from the Department of Justice regarding the assessment of inspectional overtime charges at ports of entry for airlines. The conclusion reached is that the Attorney General has the discretion to promulgate regulations exempting airlines from overtime inspection charges. The document presents questions for review, including whether the regulations exceed the INS' power to exempt airlines from overtime inspection charges and whether they interfere with the power of the Secretary of the Treasury to designate ports of entry for civil aircraft. Additionally, the document discusses the legislative history and administrative practice related to the overtime charges. It also suggests that the Attorney General has the authority to amend the regulations if necessary.

  7/27/2020

• 11/30/1981

  Applicability of 18 U.S.C. § 281 to Selling Activities of Retired Military Officers

  Section 281 of Title 18, United States Code, which prohibits certain representational activities by federal employees, is presently in force as applied to retired officers of the armed forces, and in appropriate cases a violation could warrant criminal prosecution by the Department of Justice. The prohibitions of the first paragraph of § 281 apply only to retired officers on active duty, but under its second paragraph inactive retired officers are also prohibited from engaging in certain selling activities. The prohibition in the second paragraph of § 281 was intended generally to prevent retired officers from being in a position to exert their influence in the procurement process of the military department in which they once served, and applies to representational activities in connection with the sale of services as well as the sale of goods. However, its prohibition does not extend to a situation in which the retired officer can fairly be said to be representing only himself and no one else as a seller. 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/22821/download.

  11/30/1981

• 11/20/1981

  Peace Corps Employment Policies for Pregnant Volunteers

  The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) would prohibit the Peace Corps from implementing an across-the-board policy of terminating or reassigning volunteers solely because they become pregnant while assigned overseas, or because they have an abortion. A decision to terminate a pregnant volunteer must be based on a case-by-case assessment of the volunteer's ability to function effectively in her assignment while pregnant or after delivery of the child. Under the PDA, the fact that a volunteer who has been terminated because of pregnancy chooses to have an abortion cannot be considered in a decision on her reapplication for service. Even though a specific restriction in the Peace Corps' appropriation prohibits the use of its funds to perform abortions, so that the Peace Corps may not pay for the cost of an abortion for one of its volunteers, the PDA would require the Peace Corps to continue to pay travel and per diem expenses to volunteers evacuated to have an abortion, as long as it provides such compensation to other volunteers evacuated for comparable medical conditions. The Peace Corps must also allow volunteers to draw upon their accumulated readjustment allowance to pay for an abortion, if similar access is allowed for other medical expenses. 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/22816/download.

  11/20/1981