Skip to main content

Opinions

1440 Results

Whether FCC’s Lifeline Program is a Benefit Subject to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996

Date of Issuance:

The Federal Communications Commission’s Lifeline program provides federal means-tested public benefits and must therefore comply with the eligibility restrictions set forth in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.

Collecting a subscriber’s Social Security Number before enrollment is not sufficient to verify noncitizen eligibility for participation in the Lifeline program.

Authority to Obtain and Share Statewide Voter Roll Data

Date of Issuance:

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has authority to seek statewide voter lists and share them with the Department of Homeland Security as part of its effort to identify individuals who are ineligible to vote, which other provisions of law do not limit.

Application of 10 U.S.C. § 191 and Section 8044 of Pub. L. No. 118-47 to the Defense Innovation Unit and Strategic Capabilities Office

Date of Issuance:

The Secretary of War may designate an existing Department of War organization as a defense field activity pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 191 so long as the organization’s governing statute is not inconsistent with the requirements of a defense field activity. See 10 U.S.C. §§ 191, 192.

The term “field operating agency” in defense appropriations acts means a specialized subdivision of the Office of the Secretary of War or of an Armed Service that carries out noncombat activities under the Office of the Secretary of War or the relevant Armed Service’s headquarters. The term does not include a major command or its subordinate commands, nor does it include Combat Support Agencies. See Pub. L. No. 118-47, § 8044(a)(1), 138 Stat. 460, 492 (2024).

The procedural requirements of section 8044 of Public Law 118-47 are not triggered where the action of the Secretary of War establishes a defense field activity yet does not “bring about or into existence” a new field operating agency. See Pub. L. No. 118‑47, § 8044(a)(1), (b), 138 Stat. 460, 492–93 (2024).

Constitutionality of the Presidential Records Act

Date of Issuance:

The Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional because it exceeds Congress’s enumerated and implied powers and aggrandizes the Legislative Branch at the expense of the constitutional independence and autonomy of the Executive.

Whether a Bankruptcy Judge's Appointment of a Special Master Would Violate Article III of the Constitution

Date of Issuance:

A bankruptcy court’s unilateral subdelegation of functions requiring an Article III judge’s “total control” violates Article III of the Constitution.

Proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure authorizing bankruptcy judges to appoint special masters to perform functions involving constitutionally non-core claims would deprive Article III courts of the requisite “total control.”

Preemptive Effect of Defense Production Act Order on State Law

Date of Issuance:

Presidential orders issued as an exercise of congressionally delegated authority or the President’s constitutional powers have the force of federal law under the Supremacy Clause and may preempt state law.

An order issued pursuant to the Defense Production Act may preempt state laws expressly or by conflict.

An order issued pursuant to the Defense Production Act may displace sanctions for non-compliance with a contrary consent decree, even if that consent decree rests on federal-law claims.

Harmonizing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980

Date of Issuance:

Federal housing assistance programs under section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980 provide “Federal means-tested public benefits” within the meaning of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.


Alien applicants for federal housing benefits administered under section 214 must satisfy both PRWORA’s and section 214’s eligibility requirements. Section 214’s detailed verification scheme remains effective for all benefits administered under that section.

Reconsidering State Procedures for Appointment of Competent Counsel in Postconviction Review of Capital Sentences

Date of Issuance:

In 2009, relying on Chevron, this Office concluded that 28 U.S.C. § 2265(a)(1) permits the Attorney General to condition the availability of expedited habeas proceedings on a state’s application of federal standards of competency for state postconviction counsel, including federal standards for adequate compensation. Having been asked to reconsider in view of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, we now conclude that this is not the best reading of section 2265(a)(1).

Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 1715

Date of Issuance:

Section 1715 of title 18, U.S. Code, is unconstitutional as applied to constitutionally protected firearms, including handguns, because it serves an illegitimate purpose and is inconsistent with the Nation’s tradition of firearm regulation.  See N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111, 2129–30 (2022).

The Department of Justice may not, consistent with the Constitution, enforce section 1715 with respect to constitutionally protected firearms.  The Postal Service should modify its regulations to conform with this opinion.