cfr_sections
Data license: Public Domain (U.S. Government data) · Data source: Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API
22 rows where part_number = 50 and title_number = 28 sorted by section_id
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: amendment_citations, full_text
| section_id ▼ | title_number | title_name | chapter | subchapter | part_number | part_name | subpart | subpart_name | section_number | section_heading | agency | authority | source_citation | amendment_citations | full_text |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.1 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.2 Release of information by personnel of the Department of Justice relating to criminal and civil proceedings. | DOJ | [Order No. 469-71, 36 FR 21028, Nov. 3, 1971, as amended by Order No. 602-75, 40 FR 22119, May 20, 1975] | (a) General. (1) The availability to news media of information in criminal and civil cases is a matter which has become increasingly a subject of concern in the administration of justice. The purpose of this statement is to formulate specific guidelines for the release of such information by personnel of the Department of Justice. (2) While the release of information for the purpose of influencing a trial is, of course, always improper, there are valid reasons for making available to the public information about the administration of the law. The task of striking a fair balance between the protection of individuals accused of crime or involved in civil proceedings with the Government and public understandings of the problems of controlling crime and administering government depends largely on the exercise of sound judgment by those responsible for administering the law and by representatives of the press and other media. (3) Inasmuch as the Department of Justice has generally fulfilled its responsibilities with awareness and understanding of the competing needs in this area, this statement, to a considerable extent, reflects and formalizes the standards to which representatives of the Department have adhered in the past. Nonetheless, it will be helpful in ensuring uniformity of practice to set forth the following guidelines for all personnel of the Department of Justice. (4) Because of the difficulty and importance of the questions they raise, it is felt that some portions of the matters covered by this statement, such as the authorization to make available Federal conviction records and a description of items seized at the time of arrest, should be the subject of continuing review and consideration by the Department on the basis of experience and suggestions from those within and outside the Department. (b) Guidelines to criminal actions. (1) These guidelines shall apply to the release of information to news media from the time a person is the subject of a criminal investigation until any proceeding resu… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.10 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.14 Guidelines on employee selection procedures. | DOJ | [Order No. 668-76, 41 FR 51735, Nov. 23, 1976, as amended at 43 FR 38295, Aug. 25, 1978] | The guidelines set forth below are intended as a statement of policy of the Department of Justice and will be applied by the Department in exercising its responsibilities under Federal law relating to equal employment opportunity. These guidelines are issued jointly by four agencies. Separate official adoptions follow the guidelines in this part IV as follows: Civil Service Commission, Department of Justice, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Department of Labor. For official citation see section 18 of these guidelines. Table of Contents general principles 1. Statement of Purpose A. Need for Uniformity—Issuing Agencies B. Purpose of Guidelines C. Relation to Prior Guidelines 2. Scope A. Application of Guidelines B. Employment Decisions C. Selection Procedures D. Limitations E. Indian Preference Not Affected 3. Discrimination Defined: Relationship Between Use of Selection Procedures and Discrimination A. Procedure Having Adverse Impact Constitutes Discrimination Unless Justified B. Consideration of Suitable Alternative Selection Procedures 4. Information on Impact A. Records Concerning Impact B. Applicable Race, Sex and Ethnic Groups For Record Keeping C. Evaluation of Selection Rates. The “Bottom Line” D. Adverse Impact And The “Four-Fifths Rule” E. Consideration of User's Equal Employment Opportunity Posture 5. General Standards for Validity Studies A. Acceptable types of Validity Studies B. Criterion-Related, Content, and Construct Validity C. Guidelines Are Consistent with Professional Standards D. Need For Documentation of Validity E. Accuracy and Standardization F. Caution Against Selection on Basis of Knowledges, Skills or Abilities Learned in Brief Orientation Period G. Method of Use of Selection Procedures H. Cutoff Scores I. Use of Selection Procedures for Higher Level Jobs J. Interim Use of Selection Procedures K. Review of Validity Studies for Currency 6. Use of Selection Procedures Which Have No… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.11 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.15 Representation of Federal officials and employees by Department of Justice attorneys or by private counsel furnished by the Department in civil, criminal, and congressional proceedings in which Federal employees are sued, subpoenaed, or charged in their individual capacities. | DOJ | [Order No. 970-82, 47 FR 8172, Feb. 25, 1982, as amended at Order No. 1139-86, 51 FR 27022, July 29, 1986; Order No. 1409-90, 55 FR 13130, Apr. 9, 1990] | (a) Under the procedures set forth below, a federal employee (hereby defined to include present and former Federal officials and employees) may be provided representation in civil, criminal and Congressional proceedings in which he is sued, subpoenaed, or charged in his individual capacity, not covered by § 15.1 of this chapter, when the actions for which representation is requested reasonably appear to have been performed within the scope of the employee's employment and the Attorney General or his designee determines that providing representation would otherwise be in the interest of the United States. No special form of request for representation is required when it is clear from the proceedings in a case that the employee is being sued solely in his official capacity and only equitable relief is sought. (See USAM 4-13.000) (1) When an employee believes he is entitled to representation by the Department of Justice in a proceeding, he must submit forthwith a written request for that representation, together with all process and pleadings served upon him, to his immediate supervisor or whomever is designated by the head of his department or agency. Unless the employee's employing federal agency concludes that representation is clearly unwarranted, it shall submit, in a timely manner, to the Civil Division or other appropriate litigating division (Antitrust, Civil Rights, Criminal, Land and Natural Resources or the Tax Division), a statement containing its findings as to whether the employee was acting within the scope of his employment and its recommendation for or against providing representation. The statement should be accompanied by all available factual information. In emergency situations the litigating division may initiate conditional representation after a telephone request from the appropriate official of the employing agency. In such cases, the written request and appropriate documentation must be subsequently provided. (2) Upon receipt of the individual's request for counsel, the litigating divisio… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.12 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.16 Representation of Federal employees by private counsel at Federal expense. | DOJ | [Order No. 970-82, 47 FR 8174, Feb. 25, 1982, as amended by Order No. 1409-90, 55 FR 13130, Apr. 9, 1990] | (a) Representation by private counsel at federal expense or reimbursement of private counsel fees is subject to the availability of funds and may be provided to a federal employee only in the instances described in § 50.15(a) (4), (7), (10), and (11), and in appropriate circumstances, for the purposes set forth in § 50.15(a)(2). (b) To ensure uniformity in retention and reimbursement procedures among the litigating divisions, the Civil Division shall be responsible for establishing procedures for the retention of private counsel and the reimbursement to an employee of private counsel fees, including the setting of fee schedules. In all instances where a litigating division decides to retain private counsel or to provide reimbursement of private counsel fees under this section, the Civil Division shall be consulted before the retention or reimbursement is undertaken. (c) Where private counsel is provided, the following procedures shall apply: (1) While the Department of Justice will generally defer to the employee's choice of counsel, the Department must approve in advance any private counsel to be retained under this section. Where national security interests may be involved, the Department of Justice will consult with the agency employing the federal defendant seeking representation. (2) Federal payments to private counsel for an employee will cease if the private counsel violates any of the terms of the retention agreement or the Department of Justice. (i) Decides to seek an indictment of, or to file an information against, that employee on a federal criminal charge relating to the conduct concerning which representation was undertaken; (ii) Determines that the employee's actions do not reasonably appear to have been performed within the scope of his employment; (iii) Resolves any conflict described herein and tenders representation by Department of Justice attorneys; (iv) Determines that continued representation is not in the interest of the United States; (v) Terminates the retainer with the concurre… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.13 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.17 | DOJ | [Order No. 801-78, 43 FR 43297, Sept. 25, 1978, as amended at Order No. 1409-90, 55 FR 13130, Apr. 9, 1990] | In rulemaking proceedings subject only to the procedural requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553: (a) A general prohibition applicable to all offices, boards, bureaus and divisions of the Department of Justice against the receipt of private, ex parte oral or written communications is undesirable, because it would deprive the Department of the flexibility needed to fashion rulemaking procedures appropriate to the issues involved, and would introduce a degree of formality that would, at least in most instances, result in procedures that are unduly complicated, slow, and expensive, and, at the same time, perhaps not conducive to developing all relevant information. (b) All written communications from outside the Department addressed to the merits of a proposed rule, received after notice of proposed informal rulemaking and in its course by the Department, its offices, boards, and bureaus, and divisions or their personnel participating in the decision, should be placed promptly in a file available for public inspection. (c) All oral communications from outside the Department of significant information or argument respecting the merits of a proposed rule, received after notice of proposed informal rulemaking and in its course by the Department, its offices, boards, bureaus, and divisions or their personnel participating in the decision, should be summarized in writing and placed promptly in a file available for public inspection. (d) The Department may properly withhold from the public files information exempt from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552. (e) The Department may conclude that restrictions on ex parte communications in particular rulemaking proceedings are necessitated by considerations of fairness or for other reasons. | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.14 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.18 [Reserved] | DOJ | ||||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.15 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.19 Procedures to be followed by government attorneys prior to filing recusal or disqualification motions. | DOJ | [Order No. 977-82, 47 FR 22094, May 21, 1982] | The determination to seek for any reason the disqualification or recusal of a justice, judge, or magistrate is a most significant and sensitive decision. This is particularly true for government attorneys, who should be guided by uniform procedures in obtaining the requisite authorization for such a motion. This statement is designed to establish a uniform procedure. (a) No motion to recuse or disqualify a justice, judge, or magistrate ( see, e.g., 28 U.S.C. 144, 455) shall be made or supported by any Department of Justice attorney, U.S. Attorney (including Assistant U.S. Attorneys) or agency counsel conducting litigation pursuant to agreement with or authority delegated by the Attorney General, without the prior written approval of the Assistant Attorney General having ultimate supervisory power over the action in which recusal or disqualification is being considered. (b) Prior to seeking such approval, Justice Department lawyer(s) handling the litigation shall timely seek the recommendations of the U.S. Attorney for the district in which the matter is pending, and the views of the client agencies, if any. Similarly, if agency attorneys are primarily handling any such suit, they shall seek the recommendations of the U.S. Attorney and provide them to the Department of Justice with the request for approval. In actions where the United States Attorneys are primarily handling the litigation in question, they shall seek the recommendation of the client agencies, if any, for submission to the Assistant Attorney General. (c) In the event that the conduct and pace of the litigation does not allow sufficient time to seek the prior written approval by the Assistant Attorney General, prior oral authorization shall be sought and a written record fully reflecting that authorization shall be subsequently prepared and submitted to the Assistant Attorney General. (d) Assistant Attorneys General may delegate the authority to approve or deny requests made pursuant to this section, but only to Deputy Assistant Attorneys Gener… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.16 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.20 Participation by the United States in court-annexed arbitration. | DOJ | [Order No. 1109-85, 50 FR 40524, Oct. 4, 1985] | (a) Considerations affecting participation in arbitration. (1) The Department recognizes and supports the general goals of court-annexed arbitrations, which are to reduce the time and expenses required to dispose of civil litigation. Experimentations with such procedures in appropriate cases can offer both the courts and litigants an opportunity to determine the effectiveness of arbitration as an alternative to traditional civil litigation. (2) An arbitration system, however, is best suited for the resolution of relatively simple factual issues, not for trying cases that may involve complex issues of liability or other unsettled legal questions. To expand an arbitration system beyond the types of cases for which it is best suited and most competent would risk not only a decrease in the quality of justice available to the parties but unnecessarily higher costs as well. (3) In particular, litigation involving the United States raises special concerns with respect to court-annexed arbitration programs. A mandatory arbitration program potentially implicates the principles of separation of powers, sovereign immunity, and the Attorney General's control over the process of settling litigation. (b) General rule consenting to arbitration consistent with the department's regulations. (1) Subject to the considerations set forth in the following paragraphs and the restrictions set forth in paragraphs (c) and (d), in a case assigned to arbitration or mediation under a local district court rule, the Department of Justice agrees to participate in the arbitration process under the local rule. The attorney for the government responsible for the case should take any appropriate steps in conducting the case to protect the interests of the United States. (2) Based upon its experience under arbitration programs to date, and the purposes and limitations of court-annexed arbitration, the Department generally endorses inclusion in a district's court-annexed arbitration program of civil actions— (i) In which the United States or… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.17 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.21 Procedures governing the destruction of contraband drug evidence in the custody of Federal law enforcement authorities. | DOJ | [Order No. 1256-88, 53 FR 8453, Mar. 15, 1988, as amended by Order No. 2920-2007, 72 FR 69144, Dec. 7, 2007] | (a) General. The procedures set forth below are intended as a statement of policy of the Department of Justice and will be applied by the Department in exercising its responsibilities under Federal law relating to the destruction of seized contraband drugs. (b) Purpose. This policy implements the authority of the Attorney General under title I, section 1006(c)(3) of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, Public Law 99-570 which is codified at 21 U.S.C. 881(f)(2), to direct the destruction, as necessary, of Schedule I and II contraband substances. (c) Policy. This regulation is intended to prevent the warehousing of large quantities of seized contraband drugs which are unnecessary for due process in criminal cases. Such stockpiling of contraband drugs presents inordinate security and storage problems which create additional economic burdens on limited law enforcement resources of the United States. (d) Definitions. As used in this subpart, the following terms shall have the meanings specified: (1) The term Contraband drugs are those controlled substances listed in Schedules I and II of the Controlled Substances Act seized for violation of that Act. (2) The term Marijuana is as defined in 21 U.S.C. 801(15) but does not include, for the purposes of this regulation, the derivatives hashish or hashish oil for purposes of destruction. (3) The term Representative sample means the exemplar for testing and a sample aggregate portion of the whole amount seized sufficient for current criminal evidentiary practice. (4) The term Threshold amount means: (i) Two kilograms of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin; (ii) Ten kilograms of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of— (A) Coca leaves, except coca leaves and extracts of coca leaves from which cocaine, ecgonine, and derivatives of ecognine or their salts have been removed; (B) Cocaine, its salts, optical and geometric isomers, and salts of isomers; (C) Ecgonine, its derivatives, their salts, isomers, and salt… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.18 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.22 Young American Medals Program. | DOJ | [61 FR 49260, Sept. 19, 1996] | (a) Scope. There are hereby established two medals, one to be known as the Young American Medal for Bravery and the other to be known as the Young American Medal for Service. (b) Young American Medal for Bravery. (1)(i) The Young American Medal for Bravery may be awarded to a person— (A) Who during a given calendar year has exhibited exceptional courage, attended by extraordinary decisiveness, presence of mind, and unusual swiftness of action, regardless of his or her own personal safety, in an effort to save or in saving the life of any person or persons in actual imminent danger; (B) Who was eighteen years of age or younger at the time of the occurrence; and (C) Who habitually resides in the United States (including its territories and possessions), but need not be a citizen thereof. (ii) These conditions must be met at the time of the event. (2) The act of bravery must have been public in nature and must have been acknowledged by the Governor, Chief Executive Officer of a State, county, municipality, or other political subdivision, or by a civic, educational, or religious institution, group, or society. (3) No more than two such medals may be awarded in any one calendar year. (c) Young American Medal for Service. (1) The Young American Medal for Service may be awarded to any citizen of the United States eighteen years of age or younger at the time of the occurrence, who has achieved outstanding or unusual recognition for character and service during a given calendar year. (2) Character attained and service accomplished by a candidate for this medal must have been such as to make his or her achievement worthy of public report. The outstanding and unusual recognition of the candidate's character and service must have been public in nature and must have been acknowledged by the Governor, Chief Executive Officer of a State, county, municipality, or other political subdivision, or by a civic, educational, or religious institution, group, or society. (3) The recognition of the character and service u… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.19 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.23 Policy against entering into final settlement agreements or consent decree that are subject to confidentiality provisions and against seeking or concurring in the sealing of such documents. | DOJ | [Order No. 2270-99, 64 FR 59122, Nov. 2, 1999] | (a) It is the policy of the Department of Justice that, in any civil matter in which the Department is representing the interests of the United States or its agencies, it will not enter into final settlement agreements or consent decrees that are subject to confidentiality provisions, nor will it seek or concur in the sealing of such documents. This policy flows from the principle of openness in government and is consistent with the Department's policies regarding openness in judicial proceedings (see 28 CFR 50.9) and the Freedom of Information Act (see Memorandum for Heads of Departments and Agencies from the Attorney General Re: The Freedom of Information Act (Oct. 4, 1993)). (b) There may be rare circumstances that warrant an exception to this general rule. In determining whether an exception is appropriate, any such circumstances must be considered in the context of the public's strong interest in knowing about the conduct of its Government and expenditure of its resources. The existence of such circumstances must be documented as part of the approval process, and any confidentiality provision must be drawn as narrowly as possible. Non-delegable approval authority to determine that an exception justifies use of a confidentiality provision in, or seeking or concurring in the sealing of, a final settlement or consent decree resides with the relevant Assistant Attorney General or United States Attorney, unless authority to approve the settlement itself lies with a more senior Department official, in which case the more senior official will have such approval authority. (c) Regardless of whether particular information is subject to a confidentiality provision or to seal, statutes and regulations may prohibit its disclosure from Department of Justice files. Thus, before releasing any information, Department attorneys should consult all appropriate statutes and regulations (e.g., 5 U.S.C. 552a (Privacy Act); 50 U.S.C. 403-3(c)(6) (concerning intelligence sources and methods), and Execution Order 12958 (concernin… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.2 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.3 Guidelines for the enforcement of title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964. | DOJ | [31 FR 5292, Apr. 2, 1966] | (a) Where the heads of agencies having responsibilities under title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 conclude there is noncompliance with regulations issued under that title, several alternative courses of action are open. In each case, the objective should be to secure prompt and full compliance so that needed Federal assistance may commence or continue. (b) Primary responsibility for prompt and vigorous enforcement of title VI rests with the head of each department and agency administering programs of Federal financial assistance. Title VI itself and relevant Presidential directives preserve in each agency the authority and the duty to select, from among the available sanctions, the methods best designed to secure compliance in individual cases. The decision to terminate or refuse assistance is to be made by the agency head or his designated representative. (c) This statement is intended to provide procedural guidance to the responsible department and agency officials in exercising their statutory discretion and in selecting, for each noncompliance situation, a course of action that fully conforms to the letter and spirit of section 602 of the Act and to the implementing regulations promulgated thereunder. I. Alternative Courses of Action a. ultimate sanctions The ultimate sanctions under title VI are the refusal to grant an application for assistance and the termination of assistance being rendered. Before these sanctions may be invoked, the Act requires completion of the procedures called for by section 602. That section require the department or agency concerned (1) to determine that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means, (2) to consider alternative courses of action consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statutes authorizing the particular financial assistance, (3) to afford the applicant an opportunity for a hearing, and (4) to complete the other procedural steps outlined in section 602, including notification to the appropriate committees of the Congress. In some ins… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.20 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.24 Annuity broker minimum qualifications. | DOJ | [Order No. 2667-2003, 68 FR 18120, Apr. 15, 2003] | (a) Minimum standards. The Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, shall establish a list of annuity brokers who meet minimum qualifications for providing annuity brokerage services in connection with structured settlements entered by the United States. Those qualifications are as follows: (1) The broker must have a current license issued by at least one State, the District of Columbia, or a Territory of the United States as a life insurance agent, producer, or broker; (2) The broker must have a current license or appointment issued by at least one life insurance company to sell its structured settlement annuity contracts or to act as a structured settlement consultant or broker for the company; (3) The broker must be currently covered by an Errors and Omissions insurance policy, or an equivalent form of insurance; (4) The broker must never have had a license to be a life insurance agent, producer, or broker revoked, rescinded, or suspended for any reason or for any period of time; (5) The broker must not have been convicted of a felony; and (6) The broker must have had substantial experience in each of the past three years in providing structured settlement brokerage services to or on behalf of defendants or their counsel. (b) Procedures for inclusion on the list. (1) An annuity broker who desires to be included on the list must submit a “Declaration” that he or she has reviewed the list of minimum qualifications set forth in paragraph (a) of this section and that he or she meets those minimum qualifications. A sample of the Declaration for annuity brokers to submit is available from the Civil Division's Web site ( http://www.usdoj.gov/civil/home.html ) or by written request to the address in this section. These minimum qualifications must be continually met for a broker who has been included on the list to remain included when the list is updated thereafter. The Declaration must be executed under penalty of perjury in a manner specified in 28 U.S.C. 1746. (2) Each broker must submit a n… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.21 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.25 Assumption of concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction in certain areas of Indian country. | DOJ | [AG Order No. 3314-2011, 76 FR 76042, Dec. 6, 2011] | (a) Assumption of concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction. (1) Under 18 U.S.C. 1162(d), the United States may accept concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction to prosecute violations of 18 U.S.C. 1152 (the General Crimes, or Indian Country Crimes, Act) and 18 U.S.C. 1153 (the Major Crimes, or Indian Major Crimes, Act) within areas of Indian country in the States of Alaska, California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin that are subject to State criminal jurisdiction under Public Law 280, 18 U.S.C. 1162(a), if the tribe requests such an assumption of jurisdiction and the Attorney General consents to that request. Once the Attorney General has consented to an Indian tribe's request for assumption of concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction, the General Crimes and Major Crimes Acts shall apply in the Indian country of the requesting tribe that is located in any of these “mandatory” Public Law 280 States, and criminal jurisdiction over those areas shall be concurrent among the Federal Government, the State government, and (where applicable) the tribal government. Assumption of concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. 1162(d) does not require the agreement, consent, or concurrence of any State or local government. (2) Under 25 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2), the United States may exercise concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction in other areas of Indian country as to which States have assumed “optional” Public Law 280 criminal jurisdiction under 25 U.S.C. 1321(a), if a tribe so requests and after consultation with and consent by the Attorney General. The Department's view is that such concurrent Federal criminal jurisdiction exists under applicable statutes in these areas of Indian country, even if the Federal Government does not formally accept such jurisdiction in response to petitions from individual tribes. This rule therefore does not establish procedures for processing requests from tribes under 25 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2). (b) Request requirements. (1) A tribal request for assumption of concurrent Fed… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.22 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | §§ 50.26-50.28 [Reserved] | DOJ | ||||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.3 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.5 Notification of Consular Officers upon the arrest of foreign nationals. | DOJ | [Order No. 375-67, 32 FR 1040, Jan. 28, 1967] | (a) This statement is designed to establish a uniform procedure for consular notification where nationals of foreign countries are arrested by officers of this Department on charges of criminal violations. It conforms to practice under international law and in particular implements obligations undertaken by the United States pursuant to treaties with respect to the arrest and detention of foreign nationals. Some of the treaties obligate the United States to notify the consular officer only upon the demand or request of the arrested foreign national. On the other hand, some of the treaties require notifying the consul of the arrest of a foreign national whether or not the arrested person requests such notification. (1) In every case in which a foreign national is arrested the arresting officer shall inform the foreign national that his consul will be advised of his arrest unless he does not wish such notification to be given. If the foreign national does not wish to have his consul notified, the arresting officer shall also inform him that in the event there is a treaty in force between the United States and his country which requires such notification, his consul must be notified regardless of his wishes and, if such is the case, he will be advised of such notification by the U.S. Attorney. (2) In all cases (including those where the foreign national has stated that he does not wish his consul to be notified) the local office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the local Marshal's office, as the case may be, shall inform the nearest U.S. Attorney of the arrest and of the arrested person's wishes regarding consular notification. (3) The U.S. Attorney shall then notify the appropriate consul except where he has been informed that the foreign national does not desire such notification to be made. However, if there is a treaty provision in effect which requires notification of consul, without reference to a demand or request of the arrested national, the consul shall be notified even if the arrested person h… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.4 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.6 Antitrust Division business review procedure. | DOJ | [42 FR 11831, Mar. 1, 1977] | Although the Department of Justice is not authorized to give advisory opinions to private parties, for several decades the Antitrust Division has been willing in certain circumstances to review proposed business conduct and state its enforcement intentions. This originated with a “railroad release” procedure under which the Division would forego the initiation of criminal antitrust proceedings. The procedure was subsequently expanded to encompass a “merger clearance” procedure under which the Division would state its present enforcement intention with respect to a merger or acquisition; and the Department issued a written statement entitled “Business Review Procedure.” That statement has been revised several times. 1. A request for a business review letter must be submitted in writing to the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530. 2. The Division will consider only requests with respect to proposed business conduct, which may involve either domestic or foreign commerce. 3. The Division may, in its discretion, refuse to consider a request. 4. A business review letter shall have no application to any party which does not join in the request therefor. 5. The requesting parties are under an affirmative obligation to make full and true disclosure with respect to the business conduct for which review is requested. Each request must be accompanied by all relevant data including background information, complete copies of all operative documents and detailed statements of all collateral oral understandings, if any. All parties requesting the review letter must provide the Division with whatever additional information or documents the Division may thereafter request in order to review the matter. Such additional information, if furnished orally, shall be promptly confirmed in writing. In connection with any request for review the Division will also conduct whatever independent investigation it believes is appropriate. 6. No oral clearance, release or… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.5 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.7 Consent judgments in actions to enjoin discharges of pollutants. | DOJ | [Order No. 529-73, 38 FR 19029, July 17, 1973] | (a) It is hereby established as the policy of the Department of Justice to consent to a proposed judgment in an action to enjoin discharges of pollutants into the environment only after or on condition that an opportunity is afforded persons (natural or corporate) who are not named as parties to the action to comment on the proposed judgment prior to its entry by the court. (b) To effectuate this policy, each proposed judgment which is within the scope of paragraph (a) of this section shall be lodged with the court as early as feasible but at least 30 days before the judgment is entered by the court. Prior to entry of the judgment, or some earlier specified date, the Department of Justice will receive and consider, and file with the court, any written comments, views or allegations relating to the proposed judgment. The Department shall reserve the right (1) to withdraw or withhold its consent to the proposed judgment if the comments, views and allegations concerning the judgment disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the proposed judgment is inappropriate, improper or inadequate and (2) to oppose an attempt by any person to intervene in the action. (c) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land and Natural Resources Division may establish procedures for implementing this policy. Where it is clear that the public interest in the policy hereby established is not compromised, the Assistant Attorney General may permit an exception to this policy in a specific case where extraordinary circumstances require a period shorter than 30 days or a procedure other than stated herein. | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.6 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.8 [Reserved] | DOJ | ||||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.7 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.9 Policy with regard to open judicial proceedings. | DOJ | [Order No. 914-80, 45 FR 69214, Oct. 20, 1980, as amended by Order No. 1031-83, 48 FR 49509, Oct. 26, 1983; Order No. 1115-85, 50 FR 51677, Dec. 19, 1985; Order No. 1507-91, 56 FR 32327, July 16, 1991] | Because of the vital public interest in open judicial proceedings, the Government has a general overriding affirmative duty to oppose their closure. There is, moreover, a strong presumption against closing proceedings or portions thereof, and the Department of Justice foresees very few cases in which closure would be warranted. The Government should take a position on any motion to close a judicial proceeding, and should ordinarily oppose closure; it should move for or consent to closed proceedings only when closure is plainly essential to the interests of justice. In furtherance of the Department's concern for the right of the public to attend judicial proceedings and the Department's obligation to the fair administration of justice, the following guidelines shall be adhered to by all attorneys for the United States. (a) These guidelines apply to all federal trials, pre- and post-trial evidentiary proceedings, arraignments, bond hearings, plea proceedings, sentencing proceedings, or portions thereof, except as indicated in paragraph (e) of this section. (b) A Government attorney has a compelling duty to protect the societal interest in open proceedings. (c) A Government attorney shall not move for or consent to closure of a proceeding covered by these guidelines unless: (1) No reasonable alternative exists for protecting the interests at stake; (2) Closure is clearly likely to prevent the harm sought to be avoided; (3) The degree of closure is minimized to the greatest extent possible; (4) The public is given adequate notice of the proposed closure; and, in addition, the motion for closure is made on the record, except where the disclosure of the details of the motion papers would clearly defeat the reason for closure specified under paragraph (c)(6) of this section; (5) Transcripts of the closed proceedings will be unsealed as soon as the interests requiring closure no longer obtain; and (6) Failure to close the proceedings will produce; (i) A substantial likelihood of denial of the right of any perso… | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.8 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.10 Policy regarding obtaining information from, or records of, members of the news media; and regarding questioning, arresting, or charging members of the news media. | DOJ | [90 FR 18786, May 2, 2025] | (a) Statement of principles. (1) Because freedom of the press can be no broader than the freedom of members of the news media to investigate and report the news, the Department's policy is intended to provide protection to members of the news media from certain law enforcement tools, whether criminal or civil, that might unreasonably impair lawful newsgathering activities. The policy is not intended to extend special protections to members of the news media who are the focus of criminal investigations for conduct not based on, or within the scope of, such activities. (2) In determining whether to seek information from, or records of, members of the news media, the approach in every instance must be to strike the proper balance among several vital interests: protecting national security, ensuring public safety, promoting effective law enforcement and the fair administration of justice, and safeguarding the essential role of the free press in fostering government accountability and an open society. (3) The Department views the use of certain law enforcement tools, including subpoenas, court orders issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(d) or 3123, and search warrants to seek information from, or records of, non-consenting members of the news media as extraordinary measures, not standard investigatory practices. (4) Investigative activities pursuant to this policy may also be subject to the Privacy Protection Act of 1979, 42 U.S.C. 2000aa. (b) Scope —(1) Covered individuals and entities. (i) The policy governs the use of certain law enforcement tools to obtain information from, or records of, members of the news media. (ii) Regardless of affiliation with the news media, the protections of the policy do not extend to any individual or entity who is or is reasonably likely to be— (A) A foreign power or agent of a foreign power, as those terms are defined in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801); (B) A member or affiliate of a foreign terrorist organization designated … | ||||||
| 28:28:2.0.1.1.8.0.1.9 | 28 | Judicial Administration | I | 50 | PART 50—STATEMENTS OF POLICY | § 50.12 Exchange of FBI identification records. | DOJ | [Order No. 2258-99, 64 FR 52229, Sept. 28, 1999] | (a) The Federal Bureau of Investigation, hereinafter referred to as the FBI, is authorized to expend funds for the exchange of identification records with officials of federally chartered or insured banking institutions to promote or maintain the security of those institutions and, if authorized by state statute and approved by the Director of the FBI, acting on behalf of the Attorney General, with officials of state and local governments for purposes of employment and licensing, pursuant to section 201 of Public Law 92-544, 86 Stat. 1115. Also, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 78q, 7 U.S.C. 21 (b)(4)(E), and 42 U.S.C. 2169, respectively, such records can be exchanged with certain segments of the securities industry, with registered futures associations, and with nuclear power plants. The records also may be exchanged in other instances as authorized by federal law. (b) The FBI Director is authorized by 28 CFR 0.85(j) to approve procedures relating to the exchange of identification records. Under this authority, effective September 6, 1990, the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division has made all data on identification records available for such purposes. Records obtained under this authority may be used solely for the purpose requested and cannot be disseminated outside the receiving departments, related agencies, or other authorized entities. Officials at the governmental institutions and other entities authorized to submit fingerprints and receive FBI identification records under this authority must notify the individuals fingerprinted that the fingerprints will be used to check the criminal history records of the FBI. The officials making the determination of suitability for licensing or employment shall provide the applicants the opportunity to complete, or challenge the accuracy of, the information contained in the FBI identification record. These officials also must advise the applicants that procedures for obtaining a change, correction, or updating of an FBI identification record are set forth in… |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE cfr_sections (
section_id TEXT PRIMARY KEY,
title_number INTEGER,
title_name TEXT,
chapter TEXT,
subchapter TEXT,
part_number TEXT,
part_name TEXT,
subpart TEXT,
subpart_name TEXT,
section_number TEXT,
section_heading TEXT,
agency TEXT,
authority TEXT,
source_citation TEXT,
amendment_citations TEXT,
full_text TEXT
);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_title ON cfr_sections(title_number);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_part ON cfr_sections(part_number);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_agency ON cfr_sections(agency);