- 2023 (2)
- 2022 (11)
- 2021 (14)
- 2020 (8)
- 2019 (17)
- 2018 (10)
- 2017 (8)
- 2016 (7)
- 2015 (3)
- 2014 (5)
- 2013 (6)
- 2012 (14)
- 2011 (12)
- 2010 (16)
- 2009 (27)
- 2008 (18)
- 2007 (22)
- 2006 (9)
- 2005 (17)
- 2004 (23)
- 2003 (20)
- 2002 (22)
- 2001 (35)
- 2000 (30)
- 1999 (26)
- 1998 (32)
- 1997 (29)
- 1996 (48)
- 1995 (30)
- 1994 (29)
- 1993 (23)
- 1992 (15)
- 1991 (13)
- 1990 (23)
- 1989 (50)
- 1988 (31)
- 1987 (19)
- 1986 (22)
- 1985 (18)
- 1984 (24)
- 1983 (28)
- 1982 (79)
- 1981 (71)
- 1980 (98)
- 1979 (97)
- 1978 (79)
- 1977 (93)
- 1976 (3)
- 1975 (1)
- 1974 (3)
- 1973 (1)
- 1972 (2)
- 1971 (1)
- 1970 (4)
- 1969 (2)
- 1967 (1)
- 1964 (1)
- 1963 (2)
- 1962 (3)
- 1961 (6)
- 1958 (1)
- 1957 (1)
- 1956 (2)
- 1955 (1)
- 1953 (2)
- 1952 (2)
- 1950 (1)
- 1947 (3)
- 1946 (1)
- 1945 (2)
- 1943 (1)
- 1942 (4)
- 1941 (2)
- 1939 (2)
- 1938 (1)
- 1937 (4)
- 1936 (1)
- 1935 (1)
- 1934 (4)
Opinions
Application of the Statutory Pay Cap on Administratively Determined Pay in 5 U.S.C. § 5373 to the National Science Foundation
The statutory pay cap on administratively determined pay in 5 U.S.C. § 5373 applies to the salaries that the National Science Foundation Director fixes under 42 U.S.C. § 1873(a)(1). Because some NSF employees are currently receiving salaries above section 5373’s cap, NSF must promptly take steps to come into compliance with the pay cap. NSF lacks the authority to continue to pay salaries above the cap for the purpose of mitigating the effect that implementing the cap will have on its employees.
Retaining Private Counsel to Represent the DHS Secretary in Impeachment Processes
The Department of Homeland Security may retain private counsel to assist the Department in representing itself and the Secretary in impeachment proceedings aimed at decisions or actions within the scope of the Secretary’s official duties and unaccompanied by any allegations of personal misconduct.
Application of the Comstock Act to the Mailing of Prescription Drugs That Can Be Used for Abortions
Section 1461 of title 18 of the U.S. Code does not prohibit the mailing of certain drugs that can be used to perform abortions where the sender lacks the intent that the recipient of the drugs will use them unlawfully. Because there are manifold ways in which recipients in every state may lawfully use such drugs, including to produce an abortion, the mere mailing of such drugs to a particular jurisdiction is an insufficient basis for concluding that the sender intends them to be used unlawfully.
Application of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987 to Diplomatic Visit of Palestinian Delegation
Section 1003(2) of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, which prohibits the expenditure of funds from the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United States to further the PLO’s interests, is unconstitutional to the extent it prevents the exercise of the Presi-dent’s Article II authorities to receive public ministers and to determine the manner in which the Executive engages in diplomacy with foreign representatives. The ATA therefore does not prevent PLO representatives invited by the State Department to Washington, D.C., from spending PLO funds to attend diplomatic meetings with Ex-ecutive Branch officials, including for expenses that are necessary incidents to those meetings.
Federal Vacancies Reform Act’s Application to a Vacancy for Which Prior Presidents Submitted Multiple Nominations
Upon the inauguration of a new President, the Federal Vacancies Reform Act restarts the entire timing sequence for acting service in a position that was vacant on inauguration day, authorizing an acting official to serve for up to 300 days after inauguration day, during the pendency of the new President’s first and second nominations for the vacant position, and for 210 days following the rejection, withdrawal, or return of a first or second nomination submitted by the new President.
Authority of the Department of Defense to Use Appropriations for Travel by Service Members and Dependents to Obtain Abortions
The Department of Defense may lawfully expend funds to pay for service members and their dependents to travel to obtain abortions that DoD cannot itself perform due to statutory restrictions. DoD may lawfully expend funds to pay for such travel pursuant to both its express statutory authorities and, independently, the necessary expense doctrine.
Application of the Hyde Amendment to the Provision of Transportation for Women Seeking Abortions
The Hyde Amendment’s prohibition barring the Department of Health and Human Services from expending covered funds for any abortion does not bar HHS from expending covered funds to provide transportation for women seeking abortions in circumstances in which HHS has the requisite statutory authority and appropriations to provide such transportation.
Intergovernmental Immunity for the Department of Veterans Affairs and Its Employees When Providing Certain Abortion Services
The rule issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs on Reproductive Health Services, 87 Fed. Reg. 55,287 (Sept. 9, 2022), is a lawful exercise of VA’s authority. States may not impose criminal or civil liability on VA employees—including doctors, nurses, and administrative staff—who provide or facilitate abortions or related services in a manner authorized by federal law, including VA’s rule. The Supremacy Clause bars state officials from penalizing VA employees for performing their federal functions, whether through criminal prosecution, license revocation proceedings, or civil litigation.
Use of the HEROES Act of 2003 to Cancel the Principal Amounts of Student Loans
The Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-76, 117 Stat. 904, grants the Secretary of Education authority to reduce or eliminate the obligation to repay the principal balance of federal student loan debt, including on a class-wide basis in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, provided all other requirements of the statute are satisfied.
Application of the Assimilative Crimes Act to Conduct of Federal Employees Authorized by Federal Law
Federal employees performing their duties in a manner authorized by federal law, while on a federal enclave within a state that criminalizes such authorized conduct, would not violate the Assimilative Crimes Act and could not be prosecuted by the federal government under that law.