|2009-June-11||Withdrawal of Office of Legal Counsel Opinion|
|One previous opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel concerning interrogations by the Central Intelligence Agency is withdrawn and no longer represents the views of the Office.|
|2009-April-15||Withdrawal of Office of Legal Counsel CIA Interrogation Opinions|
|Four previous opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel concerning interrogations by the Central Intelligence Agency are withdrawn and no longer represent the views of the Office.|
|2012-November-16||Whether the United States Department of Labor Has the Authority to Control the Disclosure of Federal Employee Compensation Act Records Held by the United States Postal Service|
The Federal Employee Compensation Act gives the Department of Labor the authority to control and limit the disclosure of FECA records held by the United States Postal Service, and DOL's FECA regulations prohibit USPS from disclosing FECA records in a manner inconsistent with DOL's Privacy Act routine uses.
The Labor Department's regulatory regime for FECA records is consistent with and furthers the purposes of the Privacy Act.
Neither the Postal Reorganization Act nor the National Labor Relations Act authorizes USPS to control the disclosure of FECA records.
|2010-November-05||Whether the Special Master for Troubled Asset Relief Program Executive Compensation Is a Principal Officer Under the Appointments Clause|
|The Special Master for Troubled Asset Relief Program Executive Compensation is not a principal officer for purposes of the Appointments Clause and thus need not be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.|
|2007-August-21||Whether the Office of Administration Is an “Agency” for Purposes of the Freedom of Information Act|
|The Office of Administration, which provides administrative support to entities within the Executive Office of the President, is not an agency for purposes of the Freedom of Information Act.|
|2012-March-02||Whether the General Services Administration May Proceed With an Assisted Acquisition for the Department of Veterans Affairs in Fiscal Year 2012 Using the Department's Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Funds|
The Department of Veterans Affairs properly obligated its FY 2009/2010 funds when it and the General Services Administration signed an interagency agreement in August 2010, and GSA may properly use those funds in FY 2012 to perform its obligations under the interagency agreement.
GSA may use those funds without running afoul of the requirement, developed by the Government Accountability Office, that servicing agencies acting under interagency agreements perform within a “reasonable time.”
|2009-November-24||Whether the Ten-year Minimum Sentence in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(b)(i) Applies to Semiautomatic Assault Weapons|
|Semiautomatic assault weapons are no longer among the firearms to which the ten-year minimum sentence in section 924(c)(1)(B)(i) of title 18 applies.|
|2010-April-27||Whether the Criminal Provisions of the Violence Against Women Act Apply to Otherwise Covered Conduct When the Offender and Victim Are the Same Sex|
|The criminal provisions of the Violence Against Women Act apply to otherwise covered conduct when the offender and victim are the same sex.|
|2012-April-03||Whether Reservists Who Otherwise Qualify for Leave Under Both 5 U.S.C. § 6323(a) and 5 U.S.C. § 6323(b) Must Exhaust Available Leave Under Section 6323(b) Before Taking Leave Under Section 6323(a)
|A reservist who performs military service that qualifies for leave under both 5 U.S.C. §§ 6323(a) and 6323(b) may elect to take leave under section 6323(a) without first using all of his or her available leave under section 6323(b). |
|2011-November-01||Whether Postal Employees Are Entitled to Receive Service Credit, for Purposes of Their Retirement Annuity Under the Federal Employees' Retirement System, for Periods of Employment During Which the United States Postal Service Has Not Made Its Required Employer Contributions|
|The Office of Personnel Management may not address the United States Postal Service's failure to make statutorily required retirement contributions by denying its employees accrued service credit under the Federal Employees' Retirement System during their periods of qualifying federal employment.|