Waiver of Oath of Allegiance for Candidates for Naturalization, T he required oath o f allegiance as a condition o f naturalization under section 337 o f the Im m igration, and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1448(a), cannot be waived. ) (quoting United States v. Ginsberg, 243 U.S. 472, 475 (1917)).
the ex p en d itu re o f appropriations o f th e G eneral Services A dm inistration for the purchase o f, em p lo y ee business cards. If the primary purpose is facilitating necessary agency-related, communications, we believe they may properly be purchased with general appro-, priations.
Service by Federal Officials on the Board of Directors of the, Bank for International Settlements, 18 U .S.C . These interests include those of any, organization in which [the officer o r employee] is serving as .12 U.S.C. §348a (1994) (emphasis added)., 299 U.S. 304, 320-22 (1936).
The Im m ig ratio n and N aturalization Service h as authority to institute either adm inistrative o r judicial, p ro ceed in g s to d en atu ralize citizens w hose crim inal convictions disqualified them from citizenship, as a m atter o f law . Chaunt v. United States, 364 U.S. 350, 355, (1960);
Even if a court concluded, however, that, the Boards functions require independence and Board members therefore need, tenure protection to carry out these functions, it would not necessarily follow that, the Board members would enjoy tenure protection while serving in holdover, capacities.
ment and receive the annuity under § 178; Thus, it appears that a judge who has retired under § 178, may be reappointed to the court and, upon resumption of active service, would, forfeit her retirement annuity during the period of her term of office.
, A separate section of title II defines the term wages. for, employment.ters of work in a particular type of employment.9 Rather, to effectuate the remedial, purpose of the 40 quarters exception, the Act extends benefits to all employees, who have worked for at least ten years.
The PRAs definition of federal, public benefit does not reveal such an intention. The rule has been invoked primarily in cases in which agencies seek, Chevron deference for their construction of statutes that have been expressly, entrusted to other agencies for administration, see id.
See English v. General Elec. See Rice, 331 U.S. at 230., Unless potential donors and distributors are assured that the Act sets an absolute, liability ceiling, they will continue to be deterred by the threat of liability under, state law and will not be encouraged by the Act to donate food.
Section 5 04 o f the R ehabilitation Act does n ot require accom m odation for persons unable to form, the m ental intent n ecessary to take the naturalization oath o f allegiance prescribed by section 337, o f the Im m ig ratio n and N ationality Act. See School Bd.510 U.S. 1119 (1994);
To assist NARA, in performing this function, § 2906(a)(1) authorizes NARA to inspect agency, records solely for the purpose of rendering recommendations for the improve-, ment of records management practices and programs.respect to the chapter 33 authority.e ta l. v. IRS, e t al.
See D ong v. Smithsonian !, 2The court wrote. See Ulman Opinion. See Ozee v. American Council on, Gift Annuities, 888 F. Supp. United States v. New Mexico, 455 U.S. 720, 735, (1982) (excluding certain government contractors from coverage of federal, governmental immunity from state taxation).
a statement of damages claimed;, DOT first argues that section 1012(a)(4)s explicit provision for use of the Fund, to pay claims presented by Trustees and other claimants pursuant to section 1013, must give way to principles of appropriations law applied in rulings of the Comp-, troller General.
We thus conclude that § 2669(f) incorporates only the, provisions of the first paragraph of §2672, and that the provisions of the third, paragraph authorizing payment from the Judgment Fund for certain settlements, do not apply to the State Departments settlement of foreign tort claims.
Moreover, Rule 6(e)s provisions for, disclosure of grand jury material for purposes of assisting attorneys for the, Government, or pursuant to court approval in connection with judicial pro-, ceedings, would not normally be available for purposes of DCI access. See 460, U.S. at 566-68.
Draft am endm ents to 10 U S.C. § 7902 em pow ering the P resident to delegate to the head o f a depart-, m en t his authority to appoint certain m em bers o f the N ational O cean R esearch L eadership C ouncil, w o uld not violate the C onstitutions A ppointm ents Clause. January 6 Letter at 2.
A higher-, level official, paid as an E S-6 and working in an area to which a specific locality-, based adjustment would not be applicable, would not be a covered person, , while a lower -level official, paid as an ES-4 and (for example) working in, Houston, would be covered.
The, Supreme Court has not addressed the applicability of the Fourth Amendment or, Title III to the practice of monitoring and recording inmate telephone conversa-, tions to ensure prison security and orderly administration. 468 U.S. at 530.United States v. Daniels, 902 F.2d at 1245.842 F. Supp.
DOT Appropriations Act, § 347(a). or (2) that the OSC procedures, are such an essential element of the whistleblower protections of § 2302(b) that, Congress must have implicitly included them in the provision extending sub-, stantive whistleblower protections to FAA employees.tion by the agency.
As discussed, below, the application of AEDPA § 440(d) to pending applications for section, 212(c) relief does not impair a right, increase a liability, or impose new duties, on criminal aliens., Past conduct is relevant only insofar as it may shed light on the respondents, right to remain.
