DOCSLIB.ORG

EXTENSIONS of REMARKS October 17, 1977

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EXTENSIONS of REMARKS October 17, 1977 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS October 17, 1977 Page 120, line 18, strike out "(4)" and "(11) shall be $375 for each month of any Page 126, line 3, strike out "1982" and insert in lieu thereo! " ( 5) ". taxable year ending after 1979 and before insert in lieu thereof "1986". Page 120, line 20, strike out "5.45 percent" 1981, Page 119, line 15, strike out "5.05" and in­ and insert in lieu thereof "5.55 percent". "(iii) shall be $416.66% for each month of sert in lieu thereof "5.15". Page 120, line 21, strike out "(5)" and any taxable year ending after 1980 and before Page 119, line 18, strike out "5.15" and insert in lieu thereof " ( 6) ". 1982, insert in lieu thereof "5.25". Page 120, line 22, strike out "6.00 percent" "(iv) shall be $458.33% for each month of Page 120, line 2, strike out "5.45" and and insert in lieu thereof "6.10 percent". any taxable year ending after 1981 and before insert in lieu thereof "5.55". Page 121, line 13, strike out "1985" and 1983, Page 120, line 4, strike out "6.00" and insert in lieu thereof "1982". "(v) shall be $500 for each month of any insert in lieu thereof "6.10". Page 121, after line 15, insert the following taxable year ending after 1982 and before Page 120, line 13, strike out "5.05" and new paragraph: 1984, and". insert in lieu thereof "5.15". " ( 4) in the case of any taxable year be­ Page 222, line 8, strike out "(11i)" and in­ Page 120, line 16, strike out "5.15" and ginning after December 31, 1981, and before sert in lieu thereof " (vi) ". insert in lieu thereof "5.25". January 1, 1985, the tax shall be equal to Page 222, line 10, strike out "1979" and Page 120, line 20, strike out "5.45" and 7.85 percent of the amount of the self-em­ insert in lieu thereof "1983". insert in lieu thereof "5.55". Page 222, strike out "in 1977 or 1978" in Page 120, line 22, strike out "6.00" and ployment income for such taxable year;". line 18 and all that follows down through the Page 121, line 16, strike out "(4)" and in­ insert in lieu thereof "6.10". end of line 24 and insert in lieu thereof "in Page 121, line 10, strike out "7.10" and in­ sert in lieu thereof " ( 5) ". 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, or 1982.". Page 121, line 18, strike out "8.20 per­ sert in lieu thereof "7.25". Page 223, line 6, strike out "1977" and Page 121, line 14, strike out "7.70" and cent" and insert in lieu thereof "8.35 per­ insert in lieu thereof "1978". cent". insert in lieu thereof "7.85". Page 121, line 20, strike out "(5)" and in­ Page 125, strike out lines 22 through 25 Page 121, line 18, strike out "8.20" and sert in lieu thereof " ( 6) ". and insert in lieu thereof the following: insert in lieu thereof "8.35". Page 121, line 21, strike out "9.00 percent" "(A) in 1978 shall be $19,200, Page 121, line 21, strike out "9.00" and and insert in lieu thereof "9.15 percent". "(B) in 1979 shall be $22,200, insert in lieu thereof "9.15". By Mr. STEIGER: "(C) in 1980 shall be $25,000, Page 122, line 9, strike out "1.00" and Page 222, strike out lines 3 through 7 and "(D) in 1981 shall be $26,000, insert in lieu thereof "0.90". insert in lieu thereof the following: "(E) in 1982 shall be $27,000, Page 122, line 23, strike out "1.00" and "(i) shall be $333.33% for each month of "(F) in 1983 shall be $28,700, insert in lieu thereof "0.90". any taxable year ending after 1978 and before "(G) in 1934 shall be $30,300, and Page 123, line 15, strike out "1.00" and 1980, "(H) in 1985 shall be $31,800." insert in lieu thereof "0.90". EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS A RESOLUTION FROM THE VffiGINIA I ask unanimous consent that the text SUNSET HEARINGS PORT AUTHORITY of the Virginia Port Authority resolution be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the resolu­ HON. JAMES J. BLANCHARD HON. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. tion was ordered to be printed in the OF MICHIGAN OF VIRGINIA RECORD, as follows: IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING CONCERN OVER THE Monday, October 17, 1977 FuTURE OF THE PANAMA CANAL AND THE Monday, October 17, 1977 POTENTIAL EFFECT ON THE PORTS OF VIRGINIA Mr. BLANCHARD. Mr. Speaker, the Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. Presi­ SHOULD THE CANAL BE CLOSED OR TOLLS Subcommittee on Legislation and Na­ dent, one aspect of the proposed Panama DRAMATICALLY INCREASED tional Security of the Committee on Gov­ Canal Treaties which has not yet been Whereas, much attention has been given ernment Operations held hearings this to the new treaties dealing with the position morning on the concept of "sunset" adequately explored is the likely eco­ of the United States with respect to the legislation. nomic impact should those treaties be Panama Canal; and ratified. I would like to take this opportunity to Whereas, the Panama Canal is one of the thank the committee chairman, Con­ Carter administration officials have major maritime gateways of the world pro­ viding Virginia ports and Virginia businesses gressman JACK BRooKs, on behalf of already conceded that there will prob­ the 140 Members of the House who have ably be an immediate 25- to 30-percent with considerable economic benefits evi­ denced by the fact that ships carried 10,700,- sponsored the various sunset bills which increase in tolls to help meet the costs of 000 tons of cargo, valued at $1.6 billion from Congressman MINETA and I have intro­ the treaties and this will surely have an and to Virginia's ports via the Panama duced this year. The Goverment Opera­ effect on the amount and types of goods Canal in 1976; and tions Committee's schedule has been ex­ sent through the canal. Whereas, Virginia industries, agricultural tremely crowded, and we appreciate the Such an increase would also have an products and coal mines contributed some chairman's courtesy in setting time aside adverse effect on cargo tonnage handled 2,100,000 tons of cargo valued at $320 mil­ lion to this total; and for us. by Atlantic and gulf coast ports and on Whereas, this port and business activity For the benefit of those members who longshore employment in those ports. provided some 22,500 jobs to Virginians; and are interested in the sunset concept, I I have today received a resolution from Whereas, the continued avilability of the would like to insert my te.!;timony before the board of commissioners o! the Vir­ Canal at tolls competitive with alternate the subcommittee in the RECORD. The ginia Port Authority concerning the pos­ methods of cargo movement is essential to testimony follows: sible effects of the canal treaties on Vir­ economic health in the Commonwealth as loss of the use of the Canal or prohibitive Mr. Chairman and members of the subcom­ ginia ports and employment. toll increases have the potential to divert mittee, I am grateful for the opportunity to The port authority estimates that over cargo from Virginia ports and to dislocate appear before you today to testify on the 22,000 jobs in the Commonwealth of Vir­ 22,500 Virginia jobs; and concept of "sunset" review of federal spend­ ginia are generated by Virginia ports and Whereas, such loss in jobs and maritime ing programs. I know that the schedule o! commerce would also lose to the Common­ your committee has been extremely crowded their related business activity and that this year. and I appreciate your willingness those jobs could be put in jeopardy by wealth $100 million spent to handle cargo and $6 million generated in direct taxes to to make time available for us on this issue. nonavailability of the Panama Canal or a Virginia.. The idea of sunset has come a long way substantial increase in canal tolls. Now therefore be 1t resolved, by the Board since Congressman Mineta and I introduced Mr. President, I am sure that other authority in regular meeting assembly at our "Truth in Budgeting b111 in 1975. ports on the eastern seaboard and the Richmond, Virginia, this 12th day of Octo­ I believe that is because there is a genuine gulf coast woultl be similarly affected and ber, 1977, that the Virginia Delegation to need for legislation of this type-an over­ the Congress of the United States is respect­ whelming need. therefore I believe that this matter fully urged to protect the uninterrupted The size and complexity of the federal should be fully explored by the Congress and efficient use of the Panama. Canal at government are such that if we are to try during the course of consideration of the tolls competitive with alternate methods of to exercise oversight in a reasonably effec­ proposed treaties. cargo movement to the ports of Virginia.. tive way, Congress must have a structure October 17, 1977 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 34029 which lends itself to efficient and regular It is unfortunate that some have seized streamline the organization of what is now program review. on the termination date as the embodiment an extremely complicated process, and to As all of you know, the variety and num­ of sunset.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • History of the U.S. Attorneys
    Bicentennial Celebration of the United States Attorneys 1789 - 1989 "The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor– indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." QUOTED FROM STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND, BERGER V. UNITED STATES, 295 U. S. 88 (1935) Note: The information in this document was compiled from historical records maintained by the Offices of the United States Attorneys and by the Department of Justice. Every effort has been made to prepare accurate information. In some instances, this document mentions officials without the “United States Attorney” title, who nevertheless served under federal appointment to enforce the laws of the United States in federal territories prior to statehood and the creation of a federal judicial district. INTRODUCTION In this, the Bicentennial Year of the United States Constitution, the people of America find cause to celebrate the principles formulated at the inception of the nation Alexis de Tocqueville called, “The Great Experiment.” The experiment has worked, and the survival of the Constitution is proof of that.
    [Show full text]
  • Attorney General's Task Force on Violent Crime
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. ·-"t-·~\ ,0 li 1f' 1.;. National Criminal Justice Reference Service (",.~ ,.-_ >_J \ ~ncJ,rs-----i:il'~'~ u.s. Department of Justice t 1 : j !. :I .J j This microfiche was produced from documents received for inclusion in the NCJRS data base, Since NCJRS cannot exercise control over the physical condition of the documents submitted, the individual frame quality will vary, The resolution chart on Attorney General's this frame may be used to evaluate the document quality, Task Force on Violent Crime 2 5 :; 111112.8 . 11111 . 1.0 3 2 I~ Illil . I . \ W < ,0 w n~~ ~ Final Report :i I~ ... ~ 1.1 1.i.IL:.~ I August 17, 1981 , ) 111111.25 111111.4 111111.6 i I' MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS-1963-A ~l , r~' "~ ~.,. , .. ',",' '~, Microfilming' proc~d~~e~ used to create this fiche comply with . the standards set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author(s) and do not represent the official , I .DATE FILMED! position or policies of the U. S. Department of Justice. ~. ". ~':I.....:-.~:y~:-:"" ""'-...c~-~ '."" ___""" b'""' "~' . (;F J~... .' . .. .. -.:-- ! TNati~nal i~stitut~-orJustice .. .. :lA.:· ~ . 12/01/811 .' t··· .. -, ,. .. ,. ,. ---.. -.-.~. --'-'--~ .~.~ ....~.. I , i l}nited States Department of Justice Washington, D. C. 20531 g L ..... .. i 1 I I , i~' " J ..... 1·.. " .~_)... ... r / / .. ' ...... r U.S. Department of Justice : Attorney General's Task Force on Violent Crime Final Report Task Force Members: GRIFFIN B.
    [Show full text]
  • Exclusionary Rule (1 of 2) Box: 6
    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Barr, William: Files Folder Title: Exclusionary Rule (1 of 2) Box: 6 To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ ,;:- WHITE HOUSE LAW LIBRARY ROOM 528 OEOB (2021 395-3391/ ·/ D 57 To @J1 dd:J Room~/~ From~ ( e_, flJ(l:si: t-T eep ___ To Borrow (Date Due _____, ___ Per Your Request/Per Our Conversation ditor's note: Over th e years, critics of the These justices were engaged in a less c/11sio11ary rule have called it, among other ambitious venture, albeit a most important ings, an "illogical," "-irrational," and "un­ one. They were interpreting the Fourth atural" interpretation of the Fourth and Amendment as b est they could. As they saw 011rtee11th Amendments. it, the rule-now known as the federal exclu­ Last fall, for example, U.S. Court of Ap­ sionary rule-rested on "a principled basis 5 als Judge Malcolm Wilkey, writing in the rather than an empirical proposition." all Street Journal, said the rule "is not The dissenters in United States v. Caland­ required by the Constitution . ... The exclu- ra were, I think, plainly right when they ionary rule is a judge-made rule of evidence maintained that "uppermost in the minds of hich bars 'the use of evidence secured the framers of the [exclusionary] mle" was rough an illegal search and seiz ure.' ..
    [Show full text]
  • Purposefully Restructuring the Law School Curriculum Malcolm Richard Wilkey
    BYU Law Review Volume 1981 | Issue 1 Article 15 3-1-1981 What Role for the Law School in American Legal Education? Purposefully Restructuring the Law School Curriculum Malcolm Richard Wilkey Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview Part of the Legal Education Commons, and the Legal Profession Commons Recommended Citation Malcolm Richard Wilkey, What Role for the Law School in American Legal Education? Purposefully Restructuring the Law School Curriculum, 1981 BYU L. Rev. 1 (1981). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol1981/iss1/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Brigham Young University Law Review at BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Law Review by an authorized editor of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. What Role for the Law School in American Legal Education? Purposefully Restructuring the Law School Curriculum Malcolm Richard Wilkey* I. INTRODUCTION:HOWWE GOT WHEREWE ARE .... 11. THE OBJECTIVEOF LEGALEDUCATION: PRODUCING COMPETENTLAWYERS ........................... A. Delivery of Competent Legal Services. ...... B. Fields of Competence. ..................... C. Skills Essential to the Competent Practicing Lawyer ................................... 111. THELOCUS OF LEGALEDUCATION: WHERE LAWYERS SHOULDDEVELOP THESE SKILLS. ................. A. Skills Best Acquired Outside a Legal Setting B. Skills Best Acquired Within a Substantive Legal Setting ............................. C. The English Alternative: Responsibility for Legal Training Borne by the Legal Profession IV. THEPROPER ROLE OF THE LAWSCHOOL IN THE CON- TINUUM OF AMERICANLEGAL EDUCATION .......... A. Present Defects ........................... B. Two Remedies ............................ 1. A Radical Solution: Two Tiers of Legal Education ............................. 2. A Moderate Solution: Restructuring the Third Year.
    [Show full text]
  • NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW Winter 2002 Vol
    NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW Winter 2002 Vol. 15, No. 1 Articles 1 Acceding to the WTO: Advantages for Foreign Investors in the Ukrainian Market Daniil E. Fedorchuk 61 Bank Holiday: The Constitutionality of President Mahuad’s Freezing of Accounts and the Closing of Ecuador’s Banks Jorge J. Pozo 99 External Competence of the European Community in the Hague Conference on Private International Law: Community Harmonization and Worldwide Unification Charles T. Kotuby, Jr. Recent Decisions 131 Haywin Textile Products, Inc. v. International Finance Investment and Commerce Bank, Ltd. United States District Court grants summary judgment to plaintiff, holding defendant to be a successor in interest despite controlling Bangladeshi law denying third-party beneficiaries standing to sue for enforcement of a contract. 135 United States v. Charles Kim Second Circuit Court holds that jurisdiction over defendant is proper although the act of fraud and conspiracy was not committed in the United States. 141 The European Community v. RJR Nabisco, Inc. The revenue rule is a discretionary rule, not a constitutional rule or one imperative under international law, but the European Community lacks standing to sue under RICO for injury to the revenues of its member states. 149 Fujitsu Ltd. v. Federal Express Corp. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, application of the Warsaw Convention is not terminated by the Hague protocol but continues in force until the latter takes effect for the country in question. 157 Armiliato v. Zaric-Armiliato United States District Court holds that relief under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction, as implemented by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, was appropriate once it is determined that the minor child had been wrongfully removed from her habitual residence.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Selection in the States: a Critical Study with Proposals for Reform Patrick Winston Dunn
    Hofstra Law Review Volume 4 | Issue 2 Article 3 1976 Judicial Selection in the States: A Critical Study with Proposals for Reform Patrick Winston Dunn Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr Recommended Citation Dunn, Patrick Winston (1976) "Judicial Selection in the States: A Critical Study with Proposals for Reform," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 4: Iss. 2, Article 3. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol4/iss2/3 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Dunn: Judicial Selection in the States: A Critical Study with Proposals NOTES AND COMMENTS JUDICIAL SELECTION IN THE STATES: A CRITICAL STUDY WITH PROPOSALS FOR REFORM* I. INTRODUCTION The basic consideration in every judicial establishment is the caliber of its personnel. The law as administered cannot be better than the judge who expounds it .... We need judges learned in the law, not merely the law in books but, something far more difficult to acquire, the law as applied in action in the courtroom; judges deeply versed in the mysteries of human nature and adept in the discovery of the truth in the discordant testimony of fallible human beings; judges beholden to no man, independent and honest and-equally important-believed by all men to be indepen- dent and honest; judges, above all, fired with consuming zeal to mete out justice according to law to every man, woman, and child that may come before them and to preserve individual freedom against any aggression of government; judges with the humility born of wisdom, patient and untiring in the search for truth and keenly conscious of the evils arising in a workaday world from any unnecessary delay.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reporterpublished by the American Law Institute
    VOLUME 32 • NUMBER 1 FALL 2009 The ReporterPublished By The American Law Institute DEDICATED TO CLARIFYING AND IMPROVING THE LAW XX The President’s Letter Capital Punishment and Other Matters Last May at the Annual Meeting, after (The Council report, dated April 15, At both the Council meeting and the thoughtful debate our members voted in 2009, is accessible on the Institute’s web- earlier Program Committee meeting, the favor of an amendment to a recommenda- site at http://www.ali.org/doc/Capital%20 general discussion about § 210.6 led to a tion of the Council that § 210.6 of the Punishment_web.pdf.) Because it was not look at other sections of the Model Penal Model Penal Code dealing with the death the exact recommendation of the Council, Code that also seem out of date and in penalty be withdrawn. The exact language of the motion that passed, with some members abstaining, was: …the Institute withdraws Section 210.6 of the Model Penal Code in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to For reasons stated in Part V of the ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment. Council’s report to the membership, the Institute withdraws Section 210.6 of the Model Penal Code in light of the current intractable institutional and structural this motion did not become ALI policy need of revision. That certainly applies to obstacles to ensuring a minimally ade- but was referred back to the Council for its the sections addressing the crime of rape quate system for administering capital further deliberation and vote.
    [Show full text]
  • Federalism, Localism, and Public Interest Advocacy
    Why the Local Matters: Federalism, Localism, and Public Interest Advocacy !"#$%"&$'()*+$,*%%&-./$$ 0&1&-*+2.34$'()*+2.34$*51$$ 678+2)$95%&-&.%$:1;()*)# Papers from the Eleventh Annual Liman Colloquium! at Yale Law School, 2008 Published by the Liman Public Interest Program at Yale Law School and the National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School CONTENTS ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS..............................................................................iii INTRODUCTION: ACTION ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE OF FEDERALISM ........ 1 Kathleen Claussen Class of 2010, Yale Law School; Member, Arthur Liman Public Interest Program Student Board Adam Grogg Class of 2010, Yale Law School; Member, Arthur Liman Public Interest Program Student Board Sarah French Russell Associate Research Scholar in Law and Clinical Lecturer in Law, Yale Law School; Director, Arthur Liman Public Interest Program I. THE ROLE OF LOCAL LEADERSHIP: REVISING THE HISTORY AND UNDERSTANDING THE PRESENT Civil Rights History Before, and Beyond, Brown ............................11 Risa Goluboff Professor of Law, Professor of History, Caddell & Chapman Research Professor, University of Virginia School of Law American Federalism and the American Civil Liberties Union ..... 21 Norman Dorsen Stokes Professor of Law, and Co-Director, Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program, New York University Law School; former President, American Civil Liberties Union Susan N. Herman President, American Civil Liberties Union; Centennial Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School II. STATES AND CITIES AS ADVOCATES FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST The Progressive City ........................................................................39 Richard C. Schragger Professor of Law, Class of 1948 Professor in Scholarly Research in Law, University of Virginia School of Law !"#$%"&$'()*+$<%2++$,*%%&-./$$ San Francisco and the Rising Culture of Engagement$ in Local Public Law Offices0&1&-*+2.34$'()*+2.34$*51$678+2)$95%&-&.%$:1;()*)#........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Harold Hongju Koh Yale Law School P.O
    Harold Hongju Koh Yale Law School P.O. Box 208215 New Haven, CT 06520 203 432 4932 [email protected] Employment: 2013- Sterling Professor of International Law, Yale Law School (Procedure, Public and Private International Law, Human Rights, Law and U.S. Foreign Policy, Law and National Security, Brexit and the Law, International Business Transactions, Constitution and Foreign Affairs, International Trade, International Organizations, Law of Climate Change, International Law and Political Science) 2014- Nonresident Member, Blackstone Chambers, London 2009-13: Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (on leave as Martin R. Flug ’55 Professor of International Law at Yale Law School) (awarded Secretary of State’s Distinguished Service Award 2013); Head of Delegation for U.S. Government: U.N. Human Rights Council, Assembly of States Parties International Criminal Court (Kampala 2010) 2004-2009: Dean of Yale Law School & Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law, Yale Law School 1998-2001: Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor United States Department of State; Commissioner, Commission for Security and Cooperation in Europe; U.S. Delegate or Head of Delegation to United Nations General Assembly (Third Committee), the United Nations Human Rights Commission, the Organization of American States, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the U.N. Committee Against Torture, Inaugural Community of Democracies Meeting (Warsaw 2000); U.N. Conference on New and Restored Democracies (Cotonou, Benin 2000) 1993-2009: Gerard C. & Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law, Yale Law School 1998-2004: Director, Orville H. Schell Jr., Center for International Human Rights, Yale Law School 1990-93: Professor, Yale Law School 1985-90: Associate Professor, Yale Law School 1983-85: Attorney-Adviser, Office of Legal Counsel, United States Department of Justice 1982-83: Associate, Covington & Burling, Washington, DC 1981-82: Law Clerk to Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Attorneys Department of Justice Washinlton
    Published by Executive Office for United States Attorneys Department of Justice WashInlton September 23 1960 United States DEPARTMENT OF cJUSTICE Vol.8 No.20 UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS BULLETIN 617 UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS BULLETIN Vol Sptcmber 23 1960 No 20 1DNTLT TAI The aggregate total of cases and matters pning on June 30 1960 the end of the fiscal year was 11.5087 reduction of 2226 fr the previous month While this was very encouraging reduction the drop in the number of cases terminated particular..y civil cases and the rise in the number of cases pending were not so encouraging continuation of this rise was indicated in the totals for July 31 1960 the first nth of the new fiscal year Totals in all categories of work were up and the aggregate of cases and matters pending had increased by 1690 items During July fewer cases were filed fewer cases were terminated and more cases were pending at the end of the month Set out below is cparison of the cases filed termi nated and pending during July 1959 and July 1960 July July Increase or Decrease 1959 1960 Number Filed CrIminal 1916 1709 207 10.8 Civil 2151 1863 288 13.11 Total 11067 3572 1195 -12.2 Terminated Crim1nl 1896 1600 296 156 Civil 1639 1463 176 107 Total 3535 3063 1172 13.11 Penilng Criminal 7769 7920 151 1.9 Civil 18877 19657 780 1i.i Total 266146 27577 /93i /3.5 Results in the field of collections were much more encouraging than In the area of litigation For the month of July 1960 United States Attorneys reported collections of $3162585 This is $1169816 or 58.7 per cent more then
    [Show full text]
  • Harold Hongju Koh Yale Law School P.O
    Harold Hongju Koh Yale Law School P.O. Box 208215 New Haven, CT 06520 203 432 4932 [email protected] Employment: 2013- Sterling Professor of International Law, Yale Law School (Procedure, Public and Private International Law, Human Rights, Law and U.S. Foreign Policy, Law and National Security, Brexit and the Law, International Business Transactions, Constitution and Foreign Affairs, International Trade, International Organizations, Law of Climate Change, International Law and Political Science) 2009-13: Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (on leave as Martin R. Flug ’55 Professor of International Law at Yale Law School) (awarded Secretary of State’s Distinguished Service Award 2013); Head of Delegation for U.S. Government: U.N. Human Rights Council, Assembly of States Parties International Criminal Court (Kampala 2010) 2004-2009: Dean of Yale Law School & Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law, Yale Law School 1998-2001: Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, United States Department of State; Commissioner, Commission for Security and Cooperation in Europe; U.S. Delegate or Head of Delegation to United Nations General Assembly (Third Committee), the United Nations Human Rights Commission, the Organization of American States, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the U.N. Committee Against Torture, Inaugural Community of Democracies Meeting (Warsaw 2000); U.N. Conference on New and Restored Democracies (Cotonou, Benin 2000) 1993-2009: Gerard C. & Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law, Yale Law School 1998-2004: Director, Orville H. Schell Jr., Center for International Human Rights, Yale Law School 1990-93: Professor, Yale Law School 1985-90: Associate Professor, Yale Law School 1983-85: Attorney-Adviser, Office of Legal Counsel, United States Department of Justice 1982-83: Associate, Covington & Burling, Washington, DC 1981-82: Law Clerk to Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Federal Judiciary Dinner (1)” of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 67, folder “White House - Social Federal Judiciary Dinner (1)” of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 67 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library WHITE HOUSE RECEPTION FOR THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY Guest List No. 1 (Active Federal Judges -- Washington, D. C. Area) SUPREME COURT The Chief Justice 311 N. Rochester Street Arlington, Virginia 22213 Mr. Justice Douglas 4852 Hutchins Place, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20007 Mr. Justice Brennan 3037 Dumbarton Avenue, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20007 Mr. Justice Stewart 5136 Palisade Lane, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20016 Mr. Justice White 6801 Hampshire Road McLean, Virginia 22101 Mr. Justice Marshall Supreme Court Building Washington, D. C. 20543 Mr. Justice Blackmun Supreme Court Building Washington, D. C. 20543 Mr. Justice Powell 550 N Street, S.W. Washington, D. C. 20024 Mr. Justice Rehnquist 7004 Arbor Lane McLean, Virginia 22101 Mr.
    [Show full text]