Showing 1391–1400 of 2214

• 1/17/1980

  Imposition of Agricultural Export Controls Under § 5 of the Export Administration Act of 1979

  Export of agricultural commodities can be restrained under the national security controls of § 5 of the Export Administration Act of 1979 only if the exports in question constitute "a significant contribution to the military potential" of the importing country. Whether grain exports will contribute significantly to the military potential of the Soviet Union is a question of fact for the President to determine. 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/21826/download.

  1/17/1980

• 1/9/1980

  Constitutionality of the Disclosure Provisions of the Ethics in Government Act as Applied to Officials' Spouses

  Whatever test is applied to test their constitutionally, the provisions of the Ethics in Government Act that require certain high-level officials to disclose information concerning their spouses' financial interests do not invade any constitutionally protected privacy right. The financial disclosure provisions at issue are narrowly drawn to promote Congress's interest in using disclosure to enforce substantive prohibitions vis-à-vis high-level officials. 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/22436/download.

  1/9/1980

• 1/8/1980

  Presidential Power Concerning Diplomatic Agents and Staff of the Iranian Mission

  While there is authority for imposing some travel restrictions on Iranian diplomatic personnel under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and customary international law, as well as under domestic law, those sources of law generally state that diplomats may not be placed in circumstances tantamount to house arrest, or barred from leaving the country, even as an act of reprisal for breaches of diplomatic immunity by Iran. Subjecting Iranian diplomatic personnel to prosecution under the criminal provisions of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, even if done in reprisal for Iranian breaches of international law and accompanied by all applicable protections afforded by the United States Constitution, would raise serious questions under international law. 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/22346/download.

  1/8/1980

• 1/4/1980

  Constitutionality of Affording Reduced Postal Rates to Committees of the Major Political Parties

  The Postal Service acted within its authority, under 39 U.S.C. § 3626 and other applicable statutes, when it limited special bulk third-class rates to committees of the major political parties. An argument can be made that a differential postal rate subsidy is analogous to the differential public campaign financing restrictions upheld against constitutional challenge in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976); however, the subsidy differential at issue here is more problematic than the scheme held constitutional in Buckley, because it significantly burdens minor political parties without giving them any countervailing advantages. An appropriations proviso that encourages a one-time administrative differential among political parties, and avowedly favors the major parties at the expense of all others, may be more difficult to justify than the statutory scheme upheld in Buckley, which was neutral in its long-term application. 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/24396/download.

  1/4/1980

• 1/2/1980

  Possible Participation by the United States in Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi

  As long as the government of Iran is recognized by the United States, it is entitled to maintain a lawsuit in any state or federal court; however, there is a substantial argument that the Iranian government's suit against the Shah to recover allegedly misappropriated governmental funds should be stayed or dismissed without prejudice in light of Iran's massive breaches of its treaty obligations to the United States and international law. The courts have recognized the appropriateness of deferring to the Executive's foreign policy determinations in connection with claims or defenses based on doctrines of foreign sovereign immunity or act of state. The Government's concerns over the effect of the litigation on our foreign policy provide a sufficient basis to support its standing to intervene in Iran's suit against the Shah, and there is precedent to support its intervention and assertion of cross-claims unrelated to the controversy in suit. A respectable argument can be made that the Shah enjoys sovereign immunity from suit, under the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act as well as customary international law, and the actions complained of appear to be acts of state. However, the present government of Iran may be able to waive the application of either of these doctrines to defeat its claims against the Shah, since both exist for the benefit of the state in question and not for the individuals who lead it. 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/22341/download.

  1/2/1980

• 12/28/1979

  Application of State Law to CIA's Proposed Administration of Polygraph Examinations to Its Contractors' Employees (III)

  This document is a memorandum opinion for the General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency regarding the Industrial Polygraph Program. The conclusion reached is that the State of Massachusetts may not interfere with the CIA's contractors if the administration of the polygraph test to each included category of employees is reviewed carefully by CIA officials and determined necessary to protect sensitive information. The document presents questions for review regarding the conflict between the CIA's Industrial Polygraph Program and a Massachusetts statute penalizing employers who require employees to take polygraph tests, as well as the legitimacy of the CIA's determination that the program is necessary to protect sensitive information.

  12/28/1979

• 12/28/1979

  Constitutionality of Proposed Legislation Limiting the Scope of the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule in Federal Criminal Proceedings

  This document discusses the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule in Federal criminal proceedings. It concludes that the exclusionary rule is constitutionally mandated to protect Fourth Amendment rights. However, it also suggests that Congress may provide alternative remedies that could potentially replace the exclusionary rule. The document presents a proposed legislative amendment to the Federal Torts Claim Act (FTCA) that would permit evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment to be admitted in Federal criminal proceedings under certain conditions. It also discusses the historical development of the exclusionary rule and the principles of deterrence and judicial integrity that have informed its development. The document raises questions about the effectiveness of the proposed legislative amendments and suggests that further monitoring and evaluation may be necessary before considering the abolition of the exclusionary rule.

  12/28/1979

• 12/27/1979

  Application of 10 U.S.C. § 7426 to Settlement of Dispute Between United States and Standard Oil Company Regarding Land Within Naval Petroleum Reserve

  This document is a memorandum opinion regarding the settlement of United States v. Standard Oil Co. of California. The conclusion reached is that 10 U.S.C. § 7426 precludes a settlement that would guarantee Standard Oil Co. of California more than its percentage share of oil from Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 during the period of maximum production. The questions presented for review include whether the settlement terms under consideration would allow Standard to receive more than its share of oil and whether the statute allows for exceptions to the current receipt principle. The document also discusses the legislative history and the interpretation of the statute's language to support the conclusion reached.

  12/27/1979

• 12/27/1979

  The President's Authority to Take Certain Actions Relating to Communications from Iran

  The President has statutory and constitutional authority, subject to First Amendment limitations, to limit or embargo altogether video or audio communications from Iran which aggravate the present crisis, either unilaterally or in compliance with United Nations Security Council sanctions. The First Amendment requires that any action taken to limit communications from Iran be narrowly tailored and sweep no more broadly than the underlying justification requires. A restriction that severs all communications links with Iran would be subject to less exacting First Amendment scrutiny than a more limited restriction based in whole or in part on the contents of the communication. 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/22336/download.

  12/27/1979

• 12/21/1979

  Authority of Water Resources Council to Adopt Standards and Criteria for Calculation of Primary Direct Navigation Benefits of Water Resources Project

  This document is a legal memorandum addressing the calculation of primary direct navigation benefits of a water resource project, as outlined in the Department of Transportation Act of 1966. The conclusion reached is that the factors set forth in the formula for determining the primary direct navigation benefits are exclusive and cannot be altered by the Water Resources Council. The questions presented for review include whether the Council may consider factors in addition to those specific to the formula, and whether the definition of primary direct navigation benefits prevents the Council from considering other benefits in establishing overall standards and criteria for economic evaluation of water resource projects. The document also provides a detailed analysis of the legislative history and intent behind the definition of primary direct navigation benefits.

  12/21/1979