Opinions

The President’s designation of a senior Department of Justice official to serve as Acting Attorney General was expressly authorized by the Vacancies Reform Act. That act is available to the President even though the Department’s organic statute prescribes an alternative succession mechanism for the office of Attorney General.

The President’s designation of an official who does not hold a Senate-confirmed office to serve, on a temporary basis, as Acting Attorney General was consistent with the Appointments Clause. The designation did not transform the official’s position into a principal office requiring Senate confirmation.

This Office concluded in 2011 that the prohibitions of the Wire Act in 18 U.S.C. § 1084(a) are limited to sports gambling. Having been asked to reconsider, we now conclude that the statutory prohibitions are not uniformly limited to gambling on sporting events or contests. Only the second prohibition of the first clause of section 1084(a), which criminalizes transmitting “information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest,” is so limited. The other prohibitions apply to non-sports-related betting or wagering that satisfy the other elements of section 1084(a).

The 2006 enactment of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act did not alter the scope of section 1084(a).

The President may lawfully withdraw the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement without the need for any further legislative action.

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987 may not constitutionally bar the Palestine Liberation Organization from maintaining its Washington, D.C. office and undertaking diplomatic activities the Secretary of State wishes to authorize.

In partially retroceding the criminal jurisdiction that it had obtained under Public Law 280, the State of Washington retained criminal jurisdiction over an offense on the Yakama Indian Reservation when the defendant or the victim is a non-Indian, as well as when both are non-Indians.

Under the Controlled Substances Act, the Drug Enforcement Administration may register an applicant to cultivate marijuana only if the registration scheme is consistent with the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. To comply with the Single Convention, DEA’s licensing framework must provide for a system in which DEA or its legal agent has physical possession and ownership over the cultivated marijuana and assumes control of the distribution of marijuana no later than four months after harvesting.

The President could lawfully direct airstrikes on facilities associated with Syria’s chemical-weapons capability because he had reasonably determined that the use of force would be in the national interest and that the anticipated hostilities would not rise to the level of a war in the constitutional sense.

An arbitral award of legal costs does not qualify as a refund for purposes of the “refunds to appropriations” exception to the Miscellaneous Receipts Act. The Millennium Challenge Corporation therefore must deposit the award in the general fund of the Treasury.

Section 925 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 authorizes the Department of Defense to conduct the background investigations for its personnel currently performed by the National Background Investigations Bureau of the Office of Personnel Management, including investigations to determine whether those personnel may be granted security clearances giving them access to classified information or whether they are eligible to hold sensitive positions.

This statutory reallocation of investigative authority from one part of the Executive Branch to another does not raise constitutional concerns. It does not infringe upon the President’s constitutional role in protecting national security information.

Under 40 U.SC. § 3307(a), committee approval resolutions do not establish binding limits on how the General Services Administration may expend appropriated funds. If Congress appropriates funds for a project that has not received committee approval, section 3307(a) does not constrain what the Executive Branch may do with the funds.

Committee resolutions adopted under section 3307(a) have no effect on the availability of appropriated funds for purposes of the Anti-Deficiency Act.