Showing 1341–1350 of 2202

• 4/11/1980

  The President's Authority to Control the Export of Hazardous Substances

  The Export Administration Act of 1979 continued the President's authority under its predecessor statute to control exports of hazardous substances for foreign policy purposes. The statutory criteria for a decision to impose export controls set forth in § 6(e) of the 1979 Act are not binding on the President, although he must specify his conclusions with respect to these criteria in a report to Congress. Certain statutes imposing conditions on the export of specific hazardous substances may foreclose or limit presidential discretion to take some actions under the 1979 Act. 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/24441/download.

  4/11/1980

• 4/10/1980

  Authority of the United States Olympic Committee to Send American Teams to the 1980 Summer Olympics

  The Amateur Sports Act of 1978, 36 U.S.C. § 371 et seq., does not compel the United States Olympic Committee to send American teams to any Olympics. The United States Olympic Committee may withdraw its delegation at any time before final entries are made. The Amateur Sports Act of 1978, 36 U.S.C. § 371 et seq., does not create any substantive right in an individual athlete to participate in a particular Olympic. 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/22271/download.

  4/10/1980

• 4/7/1980

  Applicability of Anti-Lottery Laws to Simultaneous Oil and Gas Leasing Procedures

  The United States and its officers are not generally exempt from the anti-lottery laws, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1302 and 1304. Although the question is not free from doubt, the legislative history and judicial construction of the anti-lottery statutes lead to the conclusion that those statutes are aimed at lotteries designed to enrich their promoters at the expense of the gambling public, and therefore do not extend to "lotteries" structured not to enrich federal coffers but for the sole purpose of distributing public leases fairly and efficiently. Long-standing congressional acquiescence in the Interior Department's Simultaneous Oil and Gas Leasing Procedures is a factor that must be considered in determining whether those procedures constitute an illegal lottery under §§ 1302 and 1304. 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/24431/download.

  4/7/1980

• 4/4/1980

  Presidential Power to Expel Diplomatic Personnel from the United States

  The President has inherent constitutional power to declare foreign diplomatic personnel persona non grata and to expel them forcibly from the United States; the exercise of this power is consistent with international law, including specifically the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Inherent in the President's power to recognize foreign countries and their ministers is implied power over the physical premises of diplomatic properties, including power to take actions necessary to protect embassies from damage, and to deny possession to or to eject those not recognized as diplomatic personnel of the sending state. A foreign diplomat who has been declared persona non grata and ordered to leave the country does not lose his diplomatic status, and thus should not be able to assert any legal entitlement to remain in the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act; nor should such an individual be able to frustrate or delay execution of an expulsion order by renouncing his diplomatic status. The Secretary of State may revoke the visas of diplomats declared persona non grata to forestall their invocation of the INA as a basis for challenging the Pre sident's expulsion order. Federal law enforcement officials, particularly the Secret Service, have authority to protect Iranian diplomatic property against third parties, including any persons not currently recognized by the United States as accredited diplomatic personnel. The President is authorized to call on the full range of his resources in the Executive Branch, including the military, and also on the resources of state or local law enforcement agencies, to carry out an expulsion order in this situation. The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment at most requires only a determination that a diplomat about to be expelled from the United States pursuant to the President's order is in fact the person ordered to be expelled; an expulsion order is arguably subject to judicial review, on a writ of habeas corpus, but only on the limited grounds of mistaken identity. 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/22361/download.

  4/4/1980

• 3/31/1980

  Extraterritorial Apprehension by the Federal Bureau of Investigation

  In the absence of an international law violation, a federal district court will not ordinarily divest itself of jurisdiction in a criminal case where the defendant's presence has been secured by his forcible abduction from the territorial limits of a foreign asylum state. A forcible abduction, when coupled with a protest by the asylum state, is a violation of international law; there is, however, some precedent that complicity of asylum state officials in the abduction could be the predicate for a finding of no actual violation of the asylum state's sovereignty. Civil liability on the part of the United States or participating government officials resulting from a fugitive's forcible apprehension in a foreign country will depend on the status of the operation under international law; liability could be predicated on theories of constitutional or common law tort, or on a violation of international law. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has no authority to apprehend and abduct a fugitive residing in a foreign state without the asylum state's consent. In the absence of asylum state consent, federal officials may be subject to extradition to the asylum state for kidnapping. 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/24426/download.

  3/31/1980

• 3/28/1980

  Legislation Authorizing the Transfer of Federal Judges From One District to Another

  Congress may by statute confer new duties on officers of the United States as long as those new duties are "germane" to their existing functions, without the necessity of reappointment under the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Shoemaker v. United States, 147 U.S. 282, 301 (1893). Constitutionality of legislation authorizing the transfer of a Federal district judge from one district to another depends upon whether the transfer is viewed as the modification of an existing position or the filling of an entirely new office. Transfer provision goes against a tradition of regionalism in the selection of district judges, and potentially infringes upon the President's power to appoint judges to the District of Columbia bench, and should be opposed on policy grounds even if not clearly forbidden by the Appointments Clause. 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/24421/download.

  3/28/1980

• 3/28/1980

  The Fourth Amendment and Intelligence Searches

  This memo examined two possible issues with the proposed National Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1980 (later enacted as the Intelligence Oversight Act). It first considered the Act’s authorization of electronic surveillance and physical searches in certain situations against American citizens located abroad who were not suspected of any criminal conduct. It then analyzed Title VIII of the Act, which established a warrant procedure for authorizing entry onto private property without notice to the owner. The memo concluded that both these provisions were constitutional, but recognized that “to many there is something deeply disturbing about the notion that government can invade their privacy in foreign countries,” and “their offense grows when the intrusion is justified by a talismanic invocation of ‘national security’—a phrase with a spotty history and an elastic definition.”

  9/2/2022

• 3/28/1980

  Whether Hasidic Jews are "Socially Disadvantaged" for Purposes of Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act

  9/2/2022

• 3/27/1980

  Representation of Government Employees in Cases Where Their Interests Diverge from Those of the United States

  The Attorney General is authorized to represent the personal interests of government employees sued in their official capacities if it will serve the interests of the United States. Even if adequate representation of an employee's personal interests in a lawsuit requires the making of an argument that conflicts with a governmental position, such representation may still serve the interests of the United States. Where the personal interests of employee-defendants conflict with the interests of the United States, as would be the case if they were to advance an argument that would support a claim against the United States, it would be in appropriate for the Attorney General either to represent them directly or to finance their representation by private counsel. If the personal interests of employee-defendants potentially conflict with the interests of the United States, the Attorney General may still represent them, if they wish him to do so, without implicating the ethical rule against representing differing interests of multiple clients. 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/24416/download.

  3/27/1980

• 3/27/1980

  Olympic Boycott

  9/2/2022