Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "118568012",
    "label": "JGR/Counsel's Office - Roles and Responsibilities",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568012"
}

{
    "id": "118568012",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568012",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "JGR/Counsel's Office - Roles and Responsibilities",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568012",
    "identifierLocal": "485",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Office of Counsel to the President (Reagan Administration)",
        "John Roberts' Subject Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-015-009-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-015-009-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-015-009-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118568012",
    "naId": 118568012,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1986-12-31",
        "year": 1986
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1982-01-01",
        "year": 1982
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-015-009-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "42d2c9f2b4784885",
    "ocrText": "Ronald Reagan Presidential Library\nDigital Library Collections\nThis is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.\nCollection: Roberts, John G.: Files\nFolder Title: JGR/Counsel's Office - Roles\nand Responsibilities\nBox: 15\nTo see more digitized collections visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library\nTo see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection\nContact a reference archivist at: [email protected]\nCitation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing\nNational Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/\nROLE AND F UNCTION OF\nTHE OFFICE OF THE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nI. Introductory Note\nThe functions of the Counsel's Office have differed with\nthe various needs and styles of Presidents. Judge Rosenmon,\nwho was Counsel to Franklin Roosevelt (and apparently the\nfirst of the breed) was primarily a speech writer, as was\nTheodore Sorenson under President Kennedy.\nUnder. President Eisenhower, the Counsel's office\nperformed both legal and general staff functions. It served as\nthe final cléarance on legislation, briefing the President on\nall bills presented for his signature or veto. In addition,\nEisenhower's Counsel served to compose differences between\nCabinet members, or at least to reduce 2 controversy to a\nsingle issue for the President to decide, as well as to exercise\na general oversight of the independent regulatory agencies\nfrom an administrative standpoint. President Johnson's Counsel\nalso performed this function, in addition to supervising an\nextensive technical review of legislative proposals.\nUnder President Ford, the Counsel's office has served\nprimarily in a managerial and supervisory role, coordinating\nthe positions of the various agencies and providing a central\ncollection and oversight function for all legal matters of concern\nto the President.\nII. Current Role of Counsel's Office\nDespite the various functions performed in the past, the\nCounsel's office has remained very small and therefore, it must\nrely on the expertise of lawyers throughout the government to\nthe maximum extent practical for research and other assistance.\nIndeed, a good description of the Counsel's role might be framed\nin a response to the question: Given the existence of the Attorney\nGeneral, and the resources of the Department of Justice,\nincluding the Office of Legal Counsel, who does the President\nneed yet another Counsel in the White House? The answer, in\nshort, is that certain functions such as managing -- from a\n- 2 -\nPresidential perspective -- the flow of legal matters involved\nin Presidential decisions, providing advice and services in\nsome uniquely Presidential matters, and exercising a general\nlegal coordination role in the Executive Branch are best done\nfrom the White House itself.\nThe basic role of the Counsel has been to manage and\noversee legal matters for the President. The Attorney General,\nthe Department of Justice and counsel in the various departments\nand agencies can provide advice and services; but there is a\nneed for a focal point in the White House to raise and receive\nlegal inquiries, transmit the proper questions to the\ndepartmental lawyers, evaluate the responses, intercept faulty\nor biased legal work, resolve or narrow conflicts, and frame\nanswers in the appropriate format for consideration by the\nPresident. There is also a need for this to be done by lawyers\nwith a uniquely Presidential perspective.\nIII. Workload and Assignments\nThe miscellany of specific functions that are performed\nby the Counsel's office can be grouped broadly into three\ncategories: (1) general counseling; (2) routine services; and\n(3) special assignments and projects.\nA. General counseling. As one of four counselors\nto the President, the Counsel to the President\nis often called upon to express his views on a\nbroad variety of subjects which come before\nthe President. The Counsel's office will\noften provide the staff assistance necessary\nto insure that the issues have been analyzed\nfrom a particularly legal perspective.\nB. Routine services. In this capacity the Counsel's\noffice provides legal advice, often based upon\nthe research done by counsel in the various\ndepartments and agencies, to other offices\nwithin the Executive Office of the President\non a variety of matters including: Freedom\nof Information Act; Executive Privilege;\nclassified information and other issues of\nconfidentiality; Constitutional and statutory\n- 3 -\npowers of the President to appoint, dismiss,\npardon, etc. ; foreign and domestic gifts,\nhonoraria and emoluments; Hatch Act and\nother political restrictions; White House\nauthorization and budget matters; and\nquestions relating to the Federal campaign\nlaws.\nCertain quasi-legal administrative duties\nare handled relating to: standards of conduct\nand conflicts of interest, security and special\nclearances; contacts with regulatory agencies,\n6\nlitigating divisions of the Department of\nJustice and the FBI; authorizations for Secret\nService protection for certain foreign officials;\nthe Interagency Classification Review\nCommittee; litigation affecting the President's\ninterests; miscellaneous requests for use of\nthe Seal of the President, invitations to the\nPresident concerning proposed memberships,\nExecutive clemency, etc. ; and Congressional\nand citizen mail.\nIn addition, the office normally provides a\nfinal review of: legislative action memoranda\ninvolving proposed Administration bills, budget\namendments, enrolled bills, special messages,\netc.; Presidential documents, including\nproclamations, executive orders, trade\nactions, and CAB decisions; and Presidential\nappointments with some attention to legal positions.\nC. Special assignments and projects. Under\nPresident Ford, the office has also assumed\nor shared responsibility for a number of\nspecial assignments and projects which include:\nthe litigation surrounding the disposition of\nformer President Nixon's tapes, documents\nand materials; review of the recommendations\nsubmitted by the Presidential Clemency\nBoard to the President; the Crime Message;\nRegulatory Reform; and serving as legal\ncounsel to the President's Task Force on\nRefugees.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE SECURITY OFFICE\nThe primary purpose of the Security Office is to protect the\nPresident from any possible embarrassment or harm.\nMajor Responsibilities:\n1.\nPassholders. The White House Security Office initiates\nand evaluates investigative reports of all White House\npass holders and a major portion of the EOB pass\nholders. These include employees of the following\noffices:\nWhite House\nCEA*\nCIEP\nDomestic Council\nGSA *\nMilitary Assistant\nNSC **\nOMB*\nOTP\nPFIAB\nPresidential Papers\nResidence\nVice President\nWhite House Communications Agency ***\nWhite House Telegraph and Travel Service\nThe Security Office authorizes all White House passes and\nmost of the EOB passes issued by Secret Service. Permanent\npasses are requested only after security requirements have\nbeen fully satisfied. When a potential problem arises with\nan investigation, the matter is referred to Counsel for\nfinal disposition.\nWhite House passes only.\nNSC initiates investigation.\nMilitary Assistant initiates.\n-2-\n2.\nPresidential Appointees. The Security Office initiates\nand evaluates the appropriate security investigation on\nPresidential Appointees. Counsel's office is advised\nimmediately upon satisfactory completion of the security\nrequirements. If an investigation reveals a potential\nproblem, Counsel is consulted for a final decision.\n3.\nSocial Events/Meetings. For such events in the Complex\nwhere a member of the First Family will be in attendance,\nFBI Name Checks are requested. Prior to an event, close\nliaison is maintained with the Social Office and/or office\nhandling the event. When a potential problem is revealed\nin the FBI check, we are in constant contact with Secret\nService. Counsel is consulted if the problem is a serious\none. Following the event, each Name Check result is carded\nand filed in our master card index. Thus, duplication is\navoided on future events. Additionally, files are coded\nafter evaluation to denote possible derogatory information.\n4.\nBackground Investigation Updates. This project continues\nthrough the year on the following basis:\nPersonnel and other pass holders - every\nthree years.\nPresidential Appointees - every five years for those\nholding the same appointments for five or more\nyears.\n5.\nReports - Weekly and Monthly. The various offices within\nthe Complex provide us with a weekly list of their\naccessions and departures. We then prepare reports\nfor the following offices:\nTour Office. Our weekly report of all departures\nassists Mr. Farrell in updating Parking Permits.\nFBI. Our monthly report of departures from the\nComplex aids the Bureau in updating their White\nHouse list accordingly. On future investigative activity,\nthe Bureau will then apprise us immediately of new\ninformation (e.g., arrest records) as it develops.\n-3- -\n6.\nMiscellaneous Investigative Activity. The Security\nOffice requests and evaluates full field investigations\nof the following employees:\n-\nAmerican Telephone & Telegraph\n-\nC&P Telephone\n-\nGovernment Services (GSI)\n-\nOther (e.g., Alderson Reports)\n-\nOther Government Agency (OGA)\npassholders whose requests\nare initiated and approved by\nthe White House. On all\nadditional requests for passes,\nthe particular department or\nagency so requesting must pro-\nvide a current full field investigation.\n7.\nSpecial Clearances. This office handles requests for\ncertain staff members and Presidential Appointees in\nclose cooperation with NSC Security and subsequent\ncontact with CIA.\n8.\nLiaison. This office is the liaison with department and\nagency security offices on all security matters.\n9.\nAccess List. The Security Office handles requests for\naccess on both temporary and permanent employees with\nan initial FBI Name Check. No one is placed on the access\nlist without a clear Name Check.\nFULL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS\n1974\nPresidentials\nStaff\nNSC\nState Dept.\nOther\nTotal\nAugust (8/9-8/31)\n4\n14\n4\n9\n1\n31\nSeptember\n8\n41\n13\n8\n1\n70\nOctober\n26\n30\n2\n7\nI\n65\nNovember\n42\n37\n7\n5\n1\n92\nDecember\n19\n33\n3\n5\nI\n60\n1975\nJanuary\n34\n84\n5\n1\n-\n124\nFebruary\n39\n60\n7\n5\nI\n111\nMarch\n15\n88\n5\n3\n-\n111\nApril\n36\n67\n7\n5\nI\n115\nMay\n21\n65\n17\n4\n1\n108\nJune\n90\n31\n6\n2\nI\n129\nTotals\n334\n550\n76\n54\n2\n1,016\nNote:\nSince we have had no files prior to August 9, 1974, it has been necessary\nto re-evaluate all prior investigations as we receive copies from the FBI\nthrough new, updated or Name Check investigations.\nNew full field investigations may contain approximately six to ninety pages.\nIf an investigation reveals no previous investigation and if there is no\nderogatory information developed in the current investigation, the report\nis short. However, if an individual has had previous investigations or one\nprior investigation contained derogatory information, the reports could be\neighty or ninety pages long. Also, if an individual's previous investigation\nwas not in summary form (e.g., Justice Dept. applicant type, Civil Service\nor Defense Investigative Service), it could be very lengthy.\nUpdated investigations are similar in that a large portion of individual\ninvestigations cover a period of years, and all previous reports are sent\nto us in the updating process.\nName Checks may be one page (individual not previously investigated) or\nperhaps fifty pages (government official). Thus, when a Name Check is\nrequested for a government official not recorded in our index, all previous\nreports are sent to us for re-evaluation, carding and filing.\nThe White House Security Office is comprised of three personnel:\nStaff Assistant for Security (evaluator)\nAdministrative Secretary\nSecurity Assistant\nFBI NAME CHECKS\n1974\nSent\nOral\nTotal\nAugust (8/9-8/31)\n132\n76\n208\nSeptember\n1,778\n133\n1,911\nOctober\n345\n107\n452\nNovember\n489\n56\n545\nDecember\n326\n125\n451\n1975\nJanuary\n327\n138\n465\nFebruary\n2,040\n104\n2,144\nMarch\n1,327\n154\n1,481\nApril\n2,922\n130\n3,052\nMay\n1,470\n227\n1,697\nJune\n1,333\n150\n1,483\nTotals\n12,489\n1,400\n13,889\noffice\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nRole file\nWAEHINGTOM\nApril 11, 1985\nMEMORANDUM FOR DAVID B. WALLER\nFROM:\nHUGH HEWITT\nAttached are some talking points that could be used in delivering\na generic \"what we do\" speech. If you have not heard the Bishop\nof Verona tale, I will fill you in on it. I welcome your comments\nand red pen.\nAttachment\nTALKING POINTS\nTHE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL'S OFFICE\n-- Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. I am pleased to be here\ntoday, pleased to have this opportunity to talk a little bit\nwith you about my work in the White House Counsel's Office\nin particular, and perhaps to answer any questions you might\nhave on the White House and how it operates in general.\n-- I welcome opportunities such as this. It is so rare that a\nlawyer is an invited and welcome guest, much less one of the\nfeatured speakers. Even lawyers hate to listen to other\nlawyers. In fact I hate to listen to lawyers.\n--\nOccasionally, very occasionally, a lawyer will have\nsomething interesting to say. I hope my few remarks will be\nthe exception, and not the rule.\n--\nLet me begin by asking you a question: What do Lloyd\nCutler, Ted Sorenson and John Dean all have in common? No,\nthey have not all authored best-sellers, and Mr. Dean is the\nonly one of them to write for Rolling Stone. They all,\nhowever, did occupy the position of Counsel to the\nPresident. While Dean is of course best known for his role\nin Watergate, and Cutler for his profile during the Iranian\nHostage negotiations, Sorenson was a speechwriter. Cutler\n-2-\nwas very much part of the inner council of the Carter\nPresidency, Dean was not one of Nixon's close advisers, and\nSorenson's role was in-between the two. The differences in\nthe roles assumed by these three men illustrate the rather\nelastic quality of the White House Counsel's Office. It is\nreally a decision of the President as to what he wants from\nthe Counsel and the Counsel's staff that will determine the\nduties and responsibilities of the office in any given\nadministration.\n-- President Reagan, it turned out, wanted a lawyer and a law\nfirm within his staff and we have taken our cue from that\ndesire. Now it may seem unusual to say that the President\nwanted a law firm within his staff. After all, he already\nhas the Department of Justice where the Attorney General\nsits atop 60,000 employees, no small number of them lawyers.\nBut despite this huge Executive Agency, there was the need\nfor a small group of lawyers, close at hand, that would view\nmatters from a Presidential perspective.\n-- It is no secret, of course, that in Washington one's\nperspective is often colored by the vantage point from which\none gets his or her view. We have thousands of fine and\nable lawyers at the Department of Justice, but the\nDepartment of Justice is not only physically situated just\nabout half-way between the White House and Congress, it can\nalso be said to have a unique view on almost every issue it\n-3-\ndeals with. The perspective that develops at 10th and\nConstitution is considerably different from one that\ndevelops at the White House. This is not a bad thing at\nall, in fact the Department of Justice would fail in its\nmission if it did not develop and communicate its collective\nview to the President. But it does not function as the\nPresident's law firm.\n--\nMost legal questions as you know are in gray areas. If an\nanswer was clear cut, there would not be a need for lawyerly\nadvice. But most issues are complicated and the President\noften needs the advice of a lawyer on a suitable course of\naction. He can and does turn to the Attorney General. But\nhe also does seek the advice of the White House's and the\nPresidency's in-house counsel.\n-- Moreover, there is a tidal wave of paper that flows through\nthe White House in any given week. There are bills to sign\nor veto. There are Presidential proclamations and\nPresidential decision memoranda. There are treaties and\nunderstandings, letters and communiques, telegrams,\nspeeches, and even autographed pictures. Most of these\nthings will emerge from the White House carrying one kind or\nanother of a Presidential imprimatur. The Counsel's Office\nis one of those places that exist to keep watch on the paper\nflow and to alert the President to any potential problems\npresented by any particular piece of paper.\n-4-\n-- When William Howard Taft assumed the Presidency, he set off\non one of those long briefings that all new Presidents must\nsit through. This one was being given by a young man fond\nof automation and process and procedure. The young man kept\nreferring to the \"machinery of government\", and how if the\nmachinery was well oiled, all would go smoothly. During\nthis presentation, a horrified Taft leaned over to one of\nhis fellow sufferers and said, \"My God, he really believes\nthat government is a machinery.\" Taft's point was that\npeople run the government. All these various boards and\nbureaus and components and divisions and departments are\nmade up of people. All the endless paper flow was, at some\npoint in the past, capped in some pen. Because it was an\nindividual who uncapped the pen somewhere in the past, we\nhave to be on the look out for human error. People exercise\njudgment, and often they will do so badly. The Counsel's\nOffice exists as a check on human error.\n-- We also function in a different capacity. I mentioned the\nDepartment of Justice. Well Justice does not see everything\nthat a President must act on. The President's incoming box\nis full of papers originating in all the other executive\nagencies, independent agencies, Congress, the state and\nlocal governments and of course private citizens. The\nJustice Department does not have the time or the inclination\nto review all those documents. The White House Counsel's\nOffice must do this.\n- -5-\n--\nObviously a lot of this work is of a recurring variety.\n--\nWe review and sign off on all enrolled bills for example.\nWhat do we look for? In pre-Chadha days -- the Supreme\nCourt's decision that struck down the device known as the\nlegislative veto -- we used to look for, among other things,\nlegislative vetoes so that Fred could alert the President\nthat a given bill had a kicker in it, some kind of\nCongressional encroachment. Today we lock for, among other\nthings, Congressional formulations of the appointment\nprocess for a new agency or board or commission. We are\nconcerned that Congress may be intruding on the President's\npower under the appointments clause of the Constitution.\n-- We are also shepherds of sort. It falls to our office to\noversee the Presidential appointment process. We are the\neye-of-a-needle folk, who meticulously review and analyze a\npotential appointee's background qualifications, and\nfinances. If you think it is difficult for a wealthy man to\nenter heaven, you ought to see them enter the Senate\nConfirmation process. At least the Lord is widely known for\nhis mercy. To prepare appointees for this gauntlet, we\ninitiate and review all the necessary FBI and IRS background\nchecks. We must also introduce prospective appointees to\nthe laws and regulations governing conduct, including the\nEthics in Government Act of 1978. In this respect we are\npleased that the practice of killing the messenger who\n-6-\nbrings bad news has gone out of style, for the requirements\nof law can often be confusing and burdensome. After we have\nprepared an appointee for the confirmation process, we are\nalso occasionally tasked to lend a hand in the actual\nproceedings on the Hill.\n-- We patrol the ethics not only of prospective appointees, but\nof members of the President's staff as well. This function\nis particularly important, as questions concerning the\npropriety of actions by members of a President's staff can\nbe very debilitating in terms of the effectiveness of a\nPresidency. And the threat never goes away. There are\nalways those people outside the government who are looking\nfor a shortcut or a favor. In this respect, Washington and\nits ways have not changed much. A century ago, just prior\nto the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1884, the leader\nof the forces for Grover Cleveland who was out capitalize on\nthe confusion in Republican camp following the bolting of\nthe Mugwumps who could not stomach the GOP's nominee, James\nBlaire, addressed his chief delegate hunter. \"Now I want\nyou to devote yourself to these doubtful men,\" said Daniel\nManning to William Hudson. \"Find out the conditions\nsurrounding them, the influences political, commercial and\nmoral\nWe must subject them to pressure, but first we must\nlearn the sort of pressure that should be applied.\"\n-7-\n-- Well, pressure in Washington has only increased in the 100\nyears since that remark. William Safire has written that\nits various forms can be calibrated: political pressure\nbegins with a mild \"talk to him\", rises to \"twist his arm\",\nthen \"lean on him\", and finally \"put his feet to the fire\".\nAll these forms of pressure can and have been brought to\nbear on members of the President's staff. The Counsel to\nthe President and his staff serve as a counterweight, a kind\nof institutional Cassandra. Do our fellow White House\nstaffers welcome this role? About as much as Scrooge\nwelcomed Marley's ghost, but in the end -- when\nembarrassment and perhaps illegality has been avoided --\nthey are as grateful as Scrooge was when Dickens completed\nhis novel.\n-- Fred also chairs the Judicial Selection Committee. This\nCommittee processes and makes final recommendations to the\nPresident on all appointments to the Supreme Court and all\nother federal courts. President Reagan will soon have made\na record number of such appointments. How challenging is\nthis task? Ask yourself: If you had the power to equip a\nfellow with a life-time job that included a comfortable\nsalary, pension, and staff allotment, as well as prestige,\nhow may applicants do you think you would have? Needless to\nsay we have many interested applicants. With many types of\nPresidential appointments, one can suitably take partisan\npolitics into account, and follow Disraeli's advice that\n-8-\n\"nothing is more ruincus to political connection than the\nfear of justly rewarding your friends and the promotion of\nordinary men of opposite opinions\nWe should always\nremember that if we were not partisans we should not be\nMinisters. \" But federal judgeships are unique among\nPresidential appointments. Justice Brennan was an\nEisenhower appointment. Three decades and seven presidents\nlater he continues to occupy his chair. We must always\nattend to the appointment of a judge with particular care.\nThey are guaranteed to be a unique legacy of the Administration.\n-- We are also involved with the obvious legal controversies\naffecting the President. He or his authority is at issue in\na number of litigation settings. We must keep an eye on\nthose cases. The Counsel also sits on the Cabinet Council\non Legal Policy where Administration policy on a host of\ndifficult legal issues is hammered out. And of course, we\nadvise the President on the subject of executive privilege,\nnever an uncontroversial subject. We are often called on to\nprovide guidance on the correct response to Congressional\nrequests for the production of Presidential or Cabinet\nCouncil documents.\n-\n[Optional]. Executive privilege disputes are always\ndifficult, usually because the players, the President and\nCongress, have absolutely no understanding of, or sympathy\n-9-\nfor, what the other is trying to do. Let me tell you a\nstory that draws on antiquity to illustrate this disparity\nin perspective. [Bishop of Verona]\n-- In today's White House these disputes on executive privilege\nand many other matters are handled by a staff of between\nfive and eight lawyers. This size is in keeping with the\ntraditions established by previous Administrations, although\nthe functions of the Counsel to the President have varied\nwidely over the past 40 years. The legal edge to most\nproblems will, if anything, grow sharper in the future. The\ncomplexity of most decisions reaching the President's desk\nguarantees that the laws of the county will in some way be\nimplicated in the decision.\n-- Its been that way for four years. Recall some of the larger\nevents of President Reagan's first term: the tax reduction\nlegislation, the decertification of PATCO, the nomination of\nJustice O'Connor, the liberation of Grenada: each of these\nand many others demanded Fred's attention and review. We\nanticipate that the next four years will hold some more\ntense weeks, some more critical decisions. There will\ncertainly be the regular flow of paper: We will be busy.\nIf we do our job well, you may never hear of us again. It\nis a lawyer's blessing when his work is obscure. I hope\nit will be our blessing to continue in our pattern of quiet\nlawyering. Now, perhaps I can answer any questions you\n-10-\nmight have on the Counsel's Office or the White House in\ngeneral.\nREMARKS BY DAVID B, WALLER\nUNIVERSITY OF TULSA COLLEGE OF LAW GRADUATION CEREMONY\nMAY 4, 1985\nTHANK YOU. DEAN WALWER, DISTINGUISHED FACULTY, GUESTS, AND SOON\nTO BE FELLOW GRADUATES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TULSA COLLEGE OF LAW,\nTHANK YOU FOR INVITING ME BACK TODAY TO MY ALMA MATER, IT'S\nCUSTOMARY IN WASHINGTON TO BEGIN FORMAL TESTIMONY BEFORE\nCONGRESSIONAL OR OTHER COMMITTEES WITH A BIT OF PERJURY -- THE\nWITNESS RECITES THAT IT IS A \"PLEASURE\" TO APPEAR BEFORE THE\nCOMMITTEE -- EVEN THOUGH, AS ALL BUT THE MOST NAIVE WITNESSES\nKNOW, AT LEAST CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ARE SALIVATING,\nANXIOUS TO EMBARK ON THEIR EFFORT TO DISCREDIT, EMBARRASS AND\nGENERALLY DEVOUR THE WITNESS. TODAY, HOWEVER, I CAN SAY WITH\nGREAT SINCERITY THAT IT TRULY IS A PLEASURE TO RETURN TO THIS\nCITY AND THIS LAW SCHOOL AND TO HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SPEAKING TO\nYOU, PARTICULARLY ON THIS SIGNIFICANT OCCASION.\nTHAT'S NOT TO SAY I DON'T LIKE OUR NATION'S CAPITOL -- I DO. BUT\nHAVING LIVED THERE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, I HAVE FOUND THAT THERE\nIS SOME JUSTIFICATION FOR JFK'S DESCRIPTION OF WASHINGTON AS A\nCITY OF \"SOUTHERN EFFICIENCY AND NORTHERN CHARM.\" I'VE NEVER\nBEEN SURE KENNEDY WAS BEING ENTIRELY FAIR TO THE SOUTH ON THE\nEFFICIENCY POINT, BUT HIS OBSERVATION ABOUT \"NORTHERN CHARM\" IS\nOFTEN HARD TO DISPUTE -- ESPECIALLY WHEN ONE COMPARES IT TO\nTULSA.\n-2-\nALTHOUGH SOMEHOW MORE THAN 11 YEARS HAVE MANAGED TO PASS SINCE MY\nLAW SCHOOL GRADUATION DAY, I ASSURE YOU I HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN, AND\nNEVER WILL FORGET, THE EXTRAORDINARY SENSE OF SATISFACTION, PRIDE\nAND, PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANTLY, DETERMINATION THAT YOU GRADUATES\nEXPERIENCE TODAY. MY MOST SINCERE CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU AND TO\nYOUR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS FOR SUPPORTING, ENCOURAGING, ENDURING\nAND OCCASIONALLY TOLERATING YOU THROUGH THIS SEEMINGLY ENDLESS\nORDEAL.\nBEFORE GOING FURTHER, I WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT IN A TELEPHONE\nCONVERSATION LAST WEEK WITH DEAN WALWER, HE WAS VERY APOLEGETIC\nIN TELLING ME THAT THERE WOULD BE NO LUNCHEON HELD IN CONNECTION\nWITH THIS CEREMONY.\nI TOLD HIM I WAS RELIEVED, NOT DISAPPOINTED. AS I EXPLAINED TO\nHIM, THE LAST TIME I SPOKE AT A LUNCHEON, THE GENTLEMAN WHO WOULD\nLATER INTRODUCE ME TURNED TO ME TOWARD THE END OF WHAT WAS A VERY\nENJOYABLE MEAL AND SAID, AS HE GLANCED AT THE AUDIENCE, \"SHALL WE\nLET THEM ENJOY THEMSELVES A LITTLE LONGER OR HAD WE BETTER HAVE\nYOUR SPEECH NOW.\" THUS FAR THE DEAN HAS BEEN FAR MORE GRACIOUS\nTHAN THAT. AND IN AN EFFORT TO RETAIN HIS GOOD GRACES AND EARN\nYOURS, I WILL EMBRACE THE ADVICE FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT GAVE HIS SON\nREGARDING THE KEY TO SUCCESSFUL SPEECHES, \"USE THE THREE B'S,\"\nHE SAID. \"BE SINCERE; BE BRIEF; BE SEATED.\"\nI THOUGHT I WOULD BEGIN BY CALLING YOUR ATTENTION TO TWO\nQUESTIONS POSED MANY YEARS AGO IN A POEM BY CARL SANDBURG. HE\nASKED:\n-3-\n\"WHY IS THERE ALWAYS A SECRET SINGING WHEN A LAWYER\nCASHES IN?\n\"WHY DOES A HEARSE HORSE SNICKER HAULING A LAWYER AWAY?\"\nTHESE ARE TOUGH QUESTIONS. OVER THE YEARS LAWYERS HAVE DEALT\nWITH THEM IN STANDARD FASHION. THROUGH LIBEL SUITS, FOR\nINSTANCE, OR BY STRICTLY REGULATING THE HORSE DRAWN HEARSE TRADE.\nI ASSURE YOU, HOWEVER, THAT SANDBURG WAS ONE OF OUR\nPROFESSION'S MORE ELOQUENT CRITICS, A WRITER OF MORE RECENT\nVINTAGE, MARIO PUZO, WAS A TOUCH MORE BLUNT IN ASSESSING THE\nWORTH OF LAWYERS: \"A LAWYER WITH A BRIEFCASE,\" HE WROTE, \"CAN\nSTEAL MORE THAN A HUNDRED MEN WITH GUNS.\"\nCONSIDER ALSO THE STORY TOLD JUST LAST WEEK IN WASHINGTON BY MARK\nFOWLER, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND\nA DISTINGUISHED LAWYER IN HIS OWN RIGHT. \"WHAT IS THE\nDIFFERENCE,\" HE ASKED, \"BETWEEN A SNAKE THAT IS RUN DOWN ON THE\nHIGHWAY AND A LAWYER WHO IS RUN DOWN ON THE HIGHWAY?\" THE\nANSWER, HE ADVISED, IS THE SKID MARKS LEADING UP TO THE SNAKE.\nFINALLY, AND PERHAPS MOST POTENTIALLY OFFENSIVE, IS THE QUESTION\n\"HOW CAN YOU TELL WHEN YOUR LAWYER IS LYING TO YOU?\" THE ANSWER\nOF COURSE IS WATCH TO SEE WHEN HIS LIPS MOVE.\nAT THIS POINT YOU GRADUATES MAY BE GROANING SILENTLY TO\nYOURSELVES AND ASKING \"DID I GATHER MY FAMILY AND VERY DEAREST\nFRIENDS SO THAT THEY COULD BE BARRAGED WITH LAWYER JOKES?\"\n-4-\nDON'T MY THREE OR MORE YEARS OF EXHAUSTING EFFORT AND SACRIFICE\nDESERVE SOMETHING MORE?\" BEAR WITH ME -- THERE'S GOOD REASON FOR\nINTRODUCING YOU TO A FEW OF THE COUNTLESS ANTI-LAWYER JOKES YOU\nWILL ENCOUNTER OVER A LONG CAREER,\nBY THE TIME ONE OF YOU IS STANDING HERE IN A FEW YEARS, FEELING\nOLD, YOU WILL NO DOUBT BE EQUIPPED WITH SEVERAL MORE ANTI-LAWYER\nSTORIES. I SUGGEST YOU COLLECT THEM; KEEP THEM ON INDEX CARDS.\nIT IS NOT A BAD THING TO BE A BUTT OF HUMOR, IT SERVES AN\nEXCELLENT PURPOSE, IN FACT, IN THAT IT REMINDS ALL OF US THAT\nLAWYERS HAVE TO BE EXTRAORDINARILY CAREFUL IN THE ATTENTION THEY\nDEVOTE TO THEIR MOST PRECIOUS ASSET -- THEIR INTEGRITY. THERE\nARE SIMPLY TOO MANY IN THIS WORLD WAITING IN AMBUSH TO ATTACK\nMEMBERS OF THE BAR FOR YOU TO BE COMPLACENT ABOUT THE ATTENTION\nYOU DEVOTE TO YOUR PROFESSIONAL ETHICS.\nAS DEAN WALWER MENTIONED, I GRADUATED FROM THIS LAW SCHOOL IN\n1973, MINE WAS A MOST INTERESTING TIME TO BE A LAW STUDENT. IT\nWAS THE TIME OF THE SENATE WATERGATE HEARINGS, AND I WAS AMONG\nTHE MANY FASCINATED BY THOSE PROCEEDINGS. AS I WATCHED THE LATE\nEVENING REPLAYS OF THE DAILY HEARINGS CHAIRED BY THE RECENTLY\nDECEASED SENATOR SAM ERVIN, I WAS PARTICULARLY INTRIGUED BY THE\nREMARKABLE TESTIMONY OF JOHN DEAN, THEN COUNSEL TO PRESIDENT\nNIXON.\nI REALIZE THAT MANY OF YOU GRADUATES WERE NOT EVEN IN HIGH SCHOOL\nWHEN THOSE EVENTS TOOK PLACE. BUT I TRUST YOU KNOW WELL THAT\nTHEY WERE UNIQUE AND HAD A PROFOUND IMPACT ON OUR PROFESSION.\n-5-\nAS THE EVENTS OF WATERGATE UNFOLDED, THEY MANAGED TO ACCOMPLISH\nTHE SEEMINGLY IMPOSSIBLE -- THEY FURTHER TARNISHED THE REPUTATION\nOF LAWYERS, THE EXPLANATION IS NOT DIFFICULT. IN HIS BOOK BLIND\nAMBITION, DEAN RECALLED THAT AT ONE POINT IN THE DRAMA HE HAD\nWRITTEN DOWN THE NAMES OF EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE ILLEGALITIES,\nAND THAT HE HAD THEN COMMENTED TO HIS ATTORNEY, \"YOU KNOW, WHAT\nIS INCREDIBLE IS THE NUMBER OF LAWYERS ON THAT LIST.\" THAT LIST,\nAS YOU NO DOUBT KNOW, INCLUDED NOT ONLY DEAN HIMSELF, BUT ALSO\nTHE FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL, JOHN MITCHELL.\nWELL, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TOO THOUGHT IT WAS INCREDIBLE, AND AS A\nRESULT A PORTION OF WATERGATE'S FALLOUT CAME TO REST ON OUR\nPROFESSION. FOCUS ON THE AREA OF LEGAL ETHICS INTENSIFIED\nDRAMATICALLY,\nGONE FOREVER WERE THE DAYS WHEN A LAW PROFESSOR WOULD GIVE ONE\nLECTURE ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, CALL THE STUDENTS'\nATTENTION TO THE CANONS, AND DISMISS THEM TO THEIR OWN\nCONSCIENCE.\nTHIS WAS A POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT, A VERY POSITIVE ONE, OF COURSE,\nUNTIL YOU ARE SAFELY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BAR EXAM, YOU MAY\nNOT BE CONVINCED, BUT I ASSURE YOU, IT IS IN THE PROFESSION'S\nBEST INTEREST THAT ITS STUDENTS FOCUS THEIR INTEREST EARLY AND\nINTENTLY ON THE SUBJECT OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY,\n-6-\nWATERGATE HAD A NUMBER OF EFFECTS, OF COURSE, FAR BEYOND ITS\nIMPACT ON THE PROFESSION'S COMMITMENT TO THE TRAINING OF ITS\nASPIRING MEMBERS. SENATOR ERVIN SAID DURING THE HEARINGS THAT IT\nWAS A CRISIS WORSE EVEN THAN THE CIVIL WAR BECAUSE AT LEAST SOME\nGOOD CAME OF THE WAR BETWEEN THE STATES. \"I SEE NO REDEEMING\nFEATURES IN WATERGATE,\" HE SAID. SAM ERVIN, LIKE MANY MEMBERS OF\nCONGRESS, WAS ENAMORED OF OVERSTATEMENT, AND I THINK HIS\nOBSERVATION WAS WRONG. IT WAS WRONG NOT ONLY IN THE UNDERLYING\nCOMPARISON, BUT ALSO IN ITS FAILURE TO ANTICIPATE THE MANY GOOD\nTHINGS THAT FLOWED FROM THE COMBINATION OF WATERGATE, THE\nSO-CALLED BERT LANCE AFFAIR, AND OTHER EVENTS THAT SHOOK THE\nPUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE IN ITS GOVERNMENT. WATERGATE AND THOSE OTHER\nUNFORTUNATE EVENTS SPAWNED, FOR EXAMPLE, A HOST OF NEW LAWS SUCH\nAS CAMPAIGN REFORM ACTS, AND THE ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT OF\n1978.\nAS A LAWYER IN THE FIRST ADMINISTRATION TO GO THROUGH A\nPRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION FOLLOWING ENACTMENT OF MOST OF THESE\nLAWS, I CAN TELL YOU FIRST-HAND THAT THEY ARE UNWIELDY,\nCOMPLICATED, OBSCURE IN MEANING, AND EXTRAORDINARILY IMPRACTICAL\nIN OPERATION. BUT THEY DO EMBODY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE'S DEMAND\nTHAT THEIR GOVERNMENT OPERATE ETHICALLY -- AND THEY ARE THE LAW,\nTHE REMAINING ISSUE IS HOW TO REFINE THESE LAWS, HOW BEST TO\nSTRIKE THE BALANCE BETWEEN DISCLOSURE AND DIVESTITURE\nREQUIREMENTS DESIGNED TO FOSTER PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT,\nAND LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THE PRIVACY INTERESTS\nOF APPOINTEES, AND ON THE ABILITY OF OUR GOVERNMENT TO ATTRACT\nQUALIFIED PUBLIC SERVANTS.\n-7-\nLET ME ASSURE YOU THAT WHILE WATERGATE HAD A PROFOUND IMPACT ON\nTHE PROFESSION AS A WHOLE, IT HAD ENORMOUS IMPACT ON THE WHITE\nHOUSE COUNSEL'S OFFICE. YOU SEE, IN RETROSPECT IT APPEARS THAT\nTHE WATERGATE DIFFICULTY AROSE AT LEAST IN PART FROM THE ABSENCE\nOF STRONGLY PRINCIPLED LAWYERS WHO BOTH ENJOYED THE PRESIDENT'S\nCONFIDENCE AND HAD THE NECESSARY ACCESS TO HIM.\nALTHOUGH THE OFFICE OF COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT HAD BEEN AROUND,\nAT LEAST IN NAME, SINCE FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT'S TIME, ITS ROLE AND\nFUNCTION WITHIN THE WHITE HOUSE HAS CHANGED CONSIDERABLY FROM\nADMINISTRATION TO ADMINISTRATION. FDR HAD AS HIS \"COUNSEL\" A\nFORMER JUDGE WHO, DESPITE THE TITLE OF COUNSEL, FUNCTIONED\nPRIMARILY AS A SPEECHWRITER. KENNEDY'S \"COUNSEL,\" TED SORENSON,\nLIKEWISE SERVED PRIMARILY AS A SPEECHWRITER, JOHN DEAN WAS NOT,\nOF COURSE, LIMITED TO WRITING SPEECHES, BUT NEITHER WAS HE A\nMEMBER OF THE WHITE HOUSE INNER CIRCLE.\nCERTAINLY SINCE WATERGATE THIS HAS BEEN REMEDIED. THE COUNSEL TO\nPRESIDENTS FORD, CARTER AND REAGAN HAVE ALL ENJOYED FAR MORE OF\nTHAT UNIQUE WASHINGTON COMMODITY: \"ACCESS TO THE PRESIDENT.\"\nAND THE PAST THREE PRESIDENTS HAVE STEADILY EXPANDED THE ROLE OF\nTHE COUNSEL'S OFFICE. NOW WE REVIEW AND RENDER A LEGAL OPINION\nON EACH OF THE COUNTLESS ENROLLED BILLS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS,\nPROCLAMATIONS, DECISION MEMORANDA, CABINET PAPERS, ETC. THAT ARE\nPRESENTED FOR THE PRESIDENT'S SIGNATURE. WE ENFORCE THE ETHICS\nLAWS AS THEY APPLY TO THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF AND WE ENDEAVOR TO\nASSURE THE COMPLIANCE OF PROSPECTIVE PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTEES WITH\nTHE NEW LAWS AND REGULATIONS.\n-8-\nWE PREPARE FOR PUBLIC RELEASE THE PRESIDENT'S ANNUAL FINANCIAL\nDISCLOSURE REPORT LISTING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, ALL HIS ASSETS,\nINCOME, ETC.\nTHERE ARE A HOST OF OTHER THINGS AS WELL. COUNSEL TO THE\nPRESIDENT CHAIRS THE JUDICIAL SELECTION COMMITTEE, WHICH\nPROCESSES AND RECOMMENDS TO THE PRESIDENT NOMINEES FOR ALL\nFEDERAL JUDGESHIPS, INCLUDING SEATS ON THE SUPREME COURT, AS WELL\nAS ALL U.S. ATTORNEY AND U.S. MARSHALL POSITIONS. WE INVOLVE\nOURSELVES IN LITIGATION WHICH HAS THE POTENTIAL OF AFFECTING THE\nPRESIDENT'S AUTHORITY OR HIS PROGRAMS -- SUCH AS SUITS SEEKING TO\nENJOIN DEPLOYMENT OF THE MX MISSILES OR THE PROVIDING OF AID TO\nEL SALVADOR. WE RESPOND TO SUBPOENAS, INCLUDING ONES IN THE\nRECENT WESTMORELAND CASE -- AND IN THAT AND MANY OTHER CONTEXTS,\nWE ADVISE THE PRESIDENT ON ISSUES RELATING TO EXECUTIVE\nPRIVILEGE, SEPARATION OF POWERS AND NATIONAL SECURITY. IN SHORT,\nWE ARE THE IN-HOUSE LAW FIRM FOR THE PRESIDENT. THERE IS VERY\nLITTLE THAT DOES NOT COME THROUGH OUR OFFICE ON THE WAY TO THE\nPRESIDENT'S DESK.\nI DIGRESSED A BIT TO DISCUSS THE POST-WATERGATE ROLE OF THE\nCOUNSEL'S OFFICE IN ORDER TO ILLUSTRATE A PARADOX OF SORTS: OUT\nOF A CRISIS THAT DAMAGED THE STANDING OF LAWYERS ACROSS THE\nCOUNTRY CAME, ODDLY ENOUGH, A HOST OF NEW LAWS AND AN INCREASED\nRELIANCE ON LAWYERS. I REJECT THE PARALLEL THAT SOME MIGHT DRAW\nBETWEEN THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE MEDICAL PRACTICE SOME CENTURIES\nAGO OF APPLYING LEECHES TO THE SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENT.\n-9-\nIN FACT, I THINK IT WAS A NATURAL, WELCOME AND NECESSARY\nDEVELOPMENT.\nWATERGATE ENGRAVED IN THE NATION'S COLLECTIVE MIND ONE SEARING\nLESSON, THE LAW CANNOT BE IGNORED. THERE ARE NO SHORTCUTS.\nLAWS ARE INTENTIONALLY BRITTLE THINGS -- THEY DO. NOT BEND EASILY.\nTHIS CRISIS TAUGHT LAWYERS ANOTHER LESSON: TELL YOUR CLIENT WHAT\nHE OR SHE NEEDS TO HEAR, NOT WHAT HE OR SHE MAY WANT TO HEAR.\nGIVE FRIENDLY LEGAL ADVICE, BUT KEEP THE EMPHASIS ON THE \"LEGAL\"\n-- NOT THE \"FRIENDLY,\"\nTHIS IS A LESSON WE LEARN OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN THE COUNSEL'S\nOFFICE. BELIEVE ME WHEN I SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT IS A DIFFICULT\nMAN TO WHOM TO SAY NO. YET HE IS A CLIENT WHO UNDERSTANDS THE\nIMPORTANCE OF GOOD LEGAL ADVICE AND DOES NOT RESIST IT. NOT ONCE\nHAS OUR OFFICE BEEN ASKED HOW TO \"GET AROUND THE LAW;\" RATHER,\nTHE CONSTANT ATTITUDE OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE WHITE HOUSE SENIOR\nSTAFF IS \"WE NEED TO BE CERTAIN THAT THE ACTION WE ARE\nCONSIDERING IS RIGHT AND LAWFUL.\" THUS, WHEN IN OUR OPINION A\nPROSPECTIVE PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTEE DOES NOT PASS LEGAL OR ETHICAL\nMUSTER, WE SAY SO,\nTO PASS ON A NOMINATION THAT SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD IS TO PLANT A\nTIME BOMB IN THE ADMINISTRATION, A TIME BOMB THAT WHEN DETONATED\nWILL ALMOST CERTAINLY DC FAR GREATER DAMAGE TO THE PRESIDENT THAN\nWOULD HAVE RESULTED FROM TURNING THUMBS DOWN ON A NOMINEE.\n-10-\nWHEN WE HAVE ONE OF OUR PERIODIC JOUSTS WITH CONGRESS OVER ACCESS\nTO EXECUTIVE BRANCH DOCUMENTS, WE HAVE TO STAND READY TO ADVISE\nTHE PRESIDENT TO RELEASE THEM IF IN FACT THE LAW REQUIRES IT,\nWHEN MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA CLAMOR OVER PRESS POOL ARRANGEMENTS OR\nOVER THEIR COLLECTIVE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, WE MAY, IF WE SO\nCONCLUDE, FIND OURSELVES SAYING TO THE PRESS SECRETARY, \"LET THEM\nIN, THIS TIME THEY ARE RIGHT.\" SEEMINGLY UNPALATABLE ADVICE IS\nVERY SIMPLY AN INDISPENSABLE COMPONENT OF GOOD AND ETHICAL\nLAWYERING.\nLET ME ALSO UNDERSCORE THAT THE COURAGE AND PROFESSIONALISM THAT\nALLOWS A LAWYER TO GIVE UNWELCOME ADVICE CARRIES WITH IT ITS OWN\nREWARD. THAT REWARD IS THE CONFIDENCE OF THE CLIENT. OUR OFFICE,\nBECAUSE IT HAS WHEN NECESSARY SAID \"NO,\" ENJOYS ENHANCED CREDIBILITY\nWHEN IT SAYS \"YES.\" WHEN PATCO STRUCK IN THE EARLY DAYS OF THE\nADMINISTRATION, AND WE ANALYZED THE SITUATION AND COUNSELED THE\nPRESIDENT THAT HE WAS WITHIN HIS RIGHTS TO FIRE THE STRIKING AIR\nTRAFFIC CONTROLLERS, PEOPLE -- INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT --\nKNEW THAT OUR JUDGMENT WAS BASED ON THE LAW, NOT ON POLITICS.\nTHE ABILITY TO SEPARATE EXPEDIENCY FROM JUDGEMENT IS THE HALLMARK\nOF A GOOD AND TRUSTWORTHY LAWYER.\nTHERE IS A PIECE OF FURNITURE IN THE OVAL OFFICE CALLED THE\nRESOLUTE DESK. IT IS THE PRESIDENT'S DESK. IT DID NOT EARN ITS\nNAME SOLELY BECAUSE IT HAS RESOLUTELY SERVED MOST OF THE\nPRESIDENTS DURING THE PAST CENTURY. IT IS MORE THAN THAT.\n-11-\nIN 1855 AN ENGLISH SHIP, THE H.M.S. RESOLUTE, BECAME FROZEN IN\nTHE HUDSON BAY. THE CREW ABANDONED HER, FEARING THAT THE ICE WOULD\nCRUSH THE WOODEN SHIP. IT DID NOT, AND WHEN SPRING ARRIVED AND\nTHE ICE MELTED, THE SHIP DRIFTED OUT TO SEA, A U.S. WHALING BOAT\nRESCUED THE RESOLUTE AND TOWED HER TO HARBOR. PRESIDENT VAN BUREN\nORDERED HER REFITTED WITH AMERICAN OAK TIMBERS, AND THEN PRESENTED\nTHE REFURBISHED SHIP TO QUEEN VICTORIA AS A TOKEN OF FRIENDSHIP.\nWHEN THE RESOLUTE WAS DECOMMISSIONED MORE THAN TWO DECADES LATER,\nQUEEN VICTORIA, STILL RULING, HAD THE TIMBERS PULLED FROM THE\nSHIP AND CRAFTED INTO THE MAGNIFICANT RESOLUTE DESK. SHE PRESENTED\nIT TO PRESIDENT HAYES, AND IT HAS SERVED NOBLY SINCE THEN AS THE\nWORK PLACE FOR MANY PRESIDENTS, THE CURRENT ONE INCLUDED.\nTHAT DESK, WITH ITS MARVELOUS PEDIGREE, PROVIDES AN APT METAPHOR\nFOR A SUCCESSFUL AND ETHICAL LAWYER. YOU WILL NOT FIND THE COMMAND\n\"BE RESOLUTE\" IN THE CANONS OF ETHICS, BUT IT IS A GOOD MOTTO FOR\nANY LAWYER, PARTICULARLY ONE JUST BEGINNING HIS OR HER CAREER.\nI WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU OF THE OBVIOUS FACT THAT YOU HAVE NO\nIDEA AS TO WHERE YOU WILL BE IN TEN YEARS, THE CAREER OF A\nLAWYER IN THE UNITED STATES IS PERHAPS AS ELASTIC AS ANY IN THE\nWORLD. YOU CAN GO TO ANY STATE AND HANG OUT A SHINGLE.\nYOU CAN PRACTICE ALONE, IN PARTNERSHIP, IN A CORPORATION OR FOR\nTHE GOVERNMENT, OR INDEED, YOU CAN TAKE THIS MARVELOUS AND\nDIFFICULT EDUCATION YOU HAVE JUST COMPLETED AND APPLY IT IN ANY\nOF A HUNDRED FIELDS FAR REMOVED FROM LAW.\n-12-\nTHIS UNLIMITED OPPORTUNITY WHICH OPENS TO A YOUNG LAWYER CARRIES\nWITH IT A CATCH. LAWYERS ARE ALLOWED MANY LOSSES IN COURT, BUT A\nSINGLE LAPSE OF ETHICAL JUDGMENT CARRIES THE POTENTIAL TO END A\nCAREER. I KNOW THIS LAW SCHOOL TRAINED YOU TO AVOID THAT. BUT\nKEEP IN MIND THAT CAUTION.\nI WAS PRIVILEGED TO BE IN THE OVAL OFFICE TWO WEEKS AGO WHEN THE\nPRESIDENT, SEATED AT THE RESOLUTE DESK, SIGNED A PROCLAMATION\nNAMING THIS PAST WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 1985, AS OUR NATION'S LAW DAY.\nIT'S EASY TO REMEMBER THE EXACT DAY OF THAT SIGNING CEREMONY\nBECAUSE THE PRESIDENT CALLED ATTENTION TO IT HIMSELF. \"IT'S\nAPRIL 15TH,\" HE SAID, \"WHAT AN APPROPRIATE DATE FOR THIS\nCEREMONY.\" LIKE MANY OTHER AMERICANS, THE PRESIDENT, WITH SOME\nINVOLVEMENT FROM OUR OFFICE, HAD BEEN WORKING ON HIS INCOME TAXES\nTHE WEEK BEFORE, AND CERTAINLY ONE PORTION OF OUR LAWS WAS ON HIS\nMIND.\nBUT PUTTING ASIDE HIS HUMOR, HE ALSO CALLED ATTENTION TO THE\nPROCLAMATION HE WAS ABOUT TO SIGN. IT READS, IN PART: \"IT IS\nTHE IDEAL OF LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL THAT HAS GUIDED OUR\nGOVERNMENT IN MAKING AND ENFORCING OUR LAWS. IT IS THE\nOPPORTUNITY FOR LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL THAT HAS INSPIRED\nAMERICANS FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE TO PARTICIPATE IN AND GIVE LIFE\nTO OUR UNIQUE FORM OF GOVERNMENT.\"\n-13-\nTHE MAN WHO SIGNED THIS PROCLAMATION CERTAINLY BELIEVES IN, AND\nIS A PRODUCT OF, A SOCIETY THAT SAFEGUARDS OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF\nITS CITIZENS. THE MAN STANDING DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PRESIDENT AS\nHE SIGNED THE PROCLAMATION, CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER, IS ANOTHER\nAMERICAN SUCCESS STORY, ONE NOT ONLY FUELED IN HIS CAREER BY THE\nLAW'S GUARANTEE OF OPPORTUNITY, BUT ONE WHO HAS IN RETURN GIVEN\nBACK A GREAT DEAL TO THE LAW. IT SHOULD BE ONE OF YOUR AIMS TO\nRETURN TO THE LAW AT LEAST AS MUCH AS IT HAS GIVEN TO YOU. I AM\nSURE THAT YOU HAVE HEARD BEFORE THAT THE CHIEF JUSTICE IS A MAN\nOF PLAIN ORIGINS, AND THAT HE ATTENDED A THEN LITTLE-KNOWN LAW\nSCHOOL'S NIGHT PROGRAM. HIS BEGINNINGS DID NOT BETRAY THE\nENORMOUS IMPACT HE WOULD HAVE ON THIS NATION'S JURISPRUDENCE. IT\nIS A GOOD THING FOR YOUNG LAWYERS TO KEEP IN MIND -- THAT THE LAW\nIS BLIND TO ORIGINS, AND BLIND TO THE CLASS AND COLOR OF PEOPLE\nBEFORE THE BAR, BUT IT SEES AND REWARDS LAWYERS OF TALENT\nEQUIPPED WITH A CAPACITY FOR HARD WORK,\nIN TWO YEARS WE WILL BE CELEBRATING THE BICENTENNIAL OF THAT MOST\nMARVELOUS DOCUMENT, THE CONSTITUTION. THAT SUCH A FRAIL PIECE OF\nPAPER HAS NOT MERELY SURVIVED TWO CENTURIES BUT ALSO SERVED AS A\nSHIELD FOR THIS COUNTRY IS A MONUMENT TO THE INGENUITY OF ITS\nDRAFTERS. BUT IT IS ALSO A MONUMENT TO MORE THAN ITS FRAMERS.\nIT IS ALSO A CELEBRATION OF ITS KEEPERS: THE LAWYERS AND JUDGES\nOF OUR PROFESSION WHO WHILE THEY HAVE TANGLED, OFTEN FEROCIOUSLY,\nOVER ITS MEANING, HAVE NEVER PARTED COMPANY ON ITS ENDURING\nQUALITY AND THE WISDOM OF ITS DESIGN.\n-14-\nIN A FEW MONTHS YOU WILL TAKE AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION.\nIF YOU REFLECT A MOMENT, YOU WILL QUICKLY REALIZE THAT THERE ARE\nVERY FEW TIMES IN YOUR LIFE WHEN YOU WILL BE ASKED TO SWEAR AN\nOATH, THAT IS SO BECAUSE OATHS ARE COMMITMENTS OF ABSOLUTE\nLOYALTY -- THEY ARE NOT, NOR SHOULD THEY BE, QUICKLY GIVEN. WHEN\nIT COMES TIME FOR YOU TO TAKE THE OATH, I HOPE YOU DO SO FIRM IN\nYOUR DEDICATION TO THE ETHICAL STANDARDS OF OUR PROFESSION AND\nSINCERE IN YOUR PROMISE TO HONOR AND UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AND\nLAWS OF OUR COUNTRY,\nTHE PRESIDENT'S LAW DAY PROCLAMATION SALUTES THE 99.9% OF OUR\nPROFESSION WHO DO SO HONOR OUR LAWS. IT IS TOO LONG TO READ TO\nYOU, BUT I'VE BROUGHT ALONG A CEREMONIAL VERSION TO PRESENT TO\nTHE LAW SCHOOL IN HONOR OF THIS GRADUATION CLASS. I HOPE YOU ALL\nHAVE A CHANCE TO READ IT AND TO REFLECT ON OUR PROFESSION'S\nCOLLECTIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE SUCCESS AND STABILITY OF OUR\nSOCIETY, AND UPON YOUR OWN INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENT TO THAT\nTRADITION. AGAIN, MY CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU, AND MY THANKS FOR\nBEING GIVEN THIS OPPORTUNITY, DEAN WALWER, I AM PLEASED TO\nPRESENT THIS SMALL TOKEN TO A SCHOOL THAT GAVE ME SO MUCH. THANK\nYOU.\n-I an Delighter to be here today at the Washington Aheria\n- Actually Dony has repeatedly serve asked that 1 spank to the\ngroup. I had dectimed really for have do in nearacy: OCP areas street of an\na\neffort\n(2) As I reminded Dong. don't thite which of voluntarily\nAHy/client provilege there can are 40,000 lawyers a this would you cck why in the werk\nthe interesting things -2-Not we to discussed publically\nmy\nTERRITORY AND USING UNDERHANDED TACTICS TO GET RECRUITS, GOD, yourselves algect\nthe\nof\nHAVING BECOME QUITE ANGRY, CALLED THE DEVIL AND SAID \"IF YOU as a Runker\nto ene of the\nthe\npute between\nspeaker.\nthe DON'T STOP THAT TRESPASSING AND THOSE ILLEGAL TACTICS, I'M GOING\nwd.\nTO SUE YOU!\" THE DEVIL THREW BACK HIS HEAD, LAUGHED AND SAID \"GO\nhad\nAHEAD, YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO FIND ANYONE TO REPRESENT YOU --\nexpering\n60fs\nEVERYONE KNOWS I'VE GOT ALL THE LAWYERS DOWN HERE.\"\nWELL, I AM HERE TO TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT THE FUNCTION AND\nOPERATION OF THE OFFICE OF COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT. LET ME TAKE\nA FEW MINUTES TO DO THAT AND LEAVE SOME TIME FOR Q AND A.\nFIRST, IN VIEWING THE OFFICE OF COUNSEL TO THE PRESDIENT\nFROM A HISTORICAL STANDPOINT, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE OFFICE'S\nFUNCTIONS HAVE DIFFERED WITH THE VARIOUS NEEDS AND STYLES OF\nPRESIDENTS:\nJUDGE ROSANMON, WHO WAS COUNSEL TO FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT\n(AND APPARENTLY THE FIRST OF THE BREED) WAS PRIMARILY A SPEECH\nWRITER, AS WAS THEODORE SORENSON UNDER PRESIDENT KENNEDY.\nUNDER PRESIDENT EISENHOWER, THE COUNSEL'S OFFICE\nPERFORMED BOTH LEGAL AND GENERAL STAFF FUNCTIONS AND SERVED AS\nTHE FINAL CLEARANCE ON LEGISLATION, IN ADDITION, IT SERVED TO\nRESOLVE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CABINET MEMBERS, OR AT LEAST TO\nREDUCE A CONTROVERSY TO A SINGLE ISSUE FOR THE PRESIDENT TO\nDECIDE.\nPRESIDENT JOHNSON'S COUNSEL PERFORMED THOSE FUNCTIONS,\nAND IN ADDITION, SUPERVISED AN EXTENSIVE TECHNICAL REVIEW OF THE\nMANY JOHNSON LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS.\n-3-\nUNDER PRESIDENT FORD, PERHAPS WITH THE HINDSIGHT OF\nWATERGATE, THE COUNSEL'S OFFICE SERVED AN EXPANDED MANAGERIAL AND\nSUPERVISORY ROLE, COORDINATING THE POSITIONS OF THE VARIOUS\nAGENCIES AND PROVIDING A CENTRAL COLLECTION AND OVERSIGHT\nFUNCTION FOR ALL LEGAL MATTERS OF CONCERN TO THE PRESIDENT.\nTHIS EXPANDED ROLE CONTINUED IN THE CARTER\nADMINISTRATION,\nWITH LLOYD CUTLER HAVING SIGNIFICANT POLICY INPUT AS WELL. IN\nTHE LATTER PART OF THAT ADMINISTRATION, HOWEVER, A GOOD PORTION\nOF THE WORK OF THE COUNSEL'S OFFICE WAS DIVERTED TO WORK ON THE\nIRANIAN HOSTAGE CRISIS.\nTHE OFFICE OF COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT IN THE CURRENT\nADMINISTRATION HAS EXPANDED ITS ROLE YET FURTHER -- FOR THE FIRST\nTIME VIRTUALLY ALL DOCUMENTS PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT FOR\nSIGNATURE ROUTINELY GO THROUGH IT. THUS, IN ADDITION TO\nREVIEWING ENROLLED BILLS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS\nWHICH IT HAD BECOME A TRADITION FOR THE COUNSEL'S OFFICE TO\nREVIEW, THROUGHOUT THIS ADMINISTRATION THE COUNSEL'S OFFICE HAS\nREVIEWED NEARLY EVERYTHING SUBMITTED FOR PRESIDENTIAL SIGNATURE.\nI WILL CITE NUMEROUS EXAMPLES IN A MOMENT.\nDESPITE DIFFERING ROLES, THROUGHOUT THE VARIOUS\nADMINISTRATIONS THE OFFICE OF COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT HAS\nREMAINED VERY SMALL, OUR OFFICE SIZE HAS RANGED FROM 5 TO 8\nLAWYERS, WHICH IS ABOUT AVERAGE FOR AT LEAST THE PAST THREE OR\nFOUR ADMINISTRATIONS. GIVEN THAT SIZE, THE OFFICE MUST RELY TO A\nLARGE EXTENT ON THE EXPERTISE OF LAWYERS THROUGHOUT THE\nGOVERNMENT FOR RESEARCH AND OTHER ASSISTANCE. IN ADDITION the office\n-4-\nTHE OFFICE IS UNIQUE IN ITS LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE,\nWHEN OUR COUNSEL'S OFFICE SET UP SHOP IN JANUARY OF 1981, THERE\nWERE NO FILES -- THEY HAD -- AND PROPERLY SO -- ALL BEEN BOXED\nAND SHIPPED BY THE ARCHIVES FOR INCLUSION IN THE CARTER\nPRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY, THE OCCASIONALLY ABSURED SITUATION IN\nWHICH THAT LEFT US CAN BE DEMONSTRATED BY A LETTER WE RECEIVED IN\nEARLY 1981. [MONDALE LETTER.]\nCEORGE 1. BARROW\nHOUSTON\nDE\nBar Examiners\nChairman-Elect\nFRANCIS D. MORRISSEY\nCHICAGO\nVice-Chairman\nAn Affiliated Organization of American Bar Association\nJOHN F. O'HARA\nLOS ANGELES\nSecretary\nSTUARTE LAMPE\nLOUISVILLE\nAlian Ashman, Executive Director\nBOARD OF MANAGERS\nWilliam H. Morris, Director of Administration\nSUMNER T. BERNSTEIN\nPORTLAND\nLEE A. SATTERFIELD\nWASHINGTON. [\nSuile 1025\n1. CUT BEATTY, IR.\nCHATTANOOGA\n332 North Michigan Avenue\nROBERT 1. MULDOON. JR.\nChicago. Illinois 60601\nBOSTON,\nJOHN E. HOLT-HARRIS. JR.\nLiez Code (312) 641-0963\nALBANY.\nMARYGOLD SHIRE MELLI\nMADISON\nW. SCOTT STREET, III\nRICHMOND\nMarch 30, 1981\n017229\nThe White House Office, Suite 500\n1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20500\nGentlemen/Ladies:\nOur Conference has been asked to prepare the required character report\nfor WALTER FREDERICK MONDALE, a member of the bar of Minnesota who is\nB\nwe\n3520\napplying for admission to the bar of the District of Columbia Court of\nAppeals.\nMSSOURI\nMr. Mondale has stated that he served 25 Vice President of the United\nStates from 1977 to 1981. May we have official verification for our report?\nThank you for your assistance.\nSincerely yours,\nW.H.Morris\nWilliam H. Merris\nDirector of Administration\nWHM/rt\nAV received for character reports is confidential and 10 official use by the proper edmitting authority\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nApril 17, 1981\nDear Mr. Morris:\nRE: Walter Frederick Mondale\nIn response to your correspondence\ndated March 30, 1981, please be\nadvised that \"official verification\"\nis difficult, as the former tenants\nof our building (January 20, 1977 -\nJanuary -20, 1981) did not leave behind\na record upon which one could rely.\nHowever, upon information and belief,\nI feel fairly confident that the data\nas to the particular applicant is\naccurate.\nSincerely,\nFred F. Fielding\nCounsel to the President\nMr. William H. Morris\nDirector of Administration\nNational Conference of\nBar Examiners\nSuite 1025\n333 North Michigan Avenue\nChicago, Illinois 60601\n-5-\nhas procion\nlittle recordt\nTHUS, AS YOU CAN EXTRAPOLATE FROM THIS, OUR OFFICE SIMPLY HAS TO\nRELY HEAVILY ON THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND GENERAL COUNSEL OF\nTHE VARIOUS AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS ON TECHNICAL LEGAL MATTERS,\nA FURTHER DESCRIPTION OF OUR OFFICE'S ROLE CAN BE FRAMED IN\nA RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: GIVEN THE EXISTENCE OF THE ATTORNEY\nGENERAL, AND THE RESOURCES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, WHY DOES\nTHE PRESIDENT NEED YET ANOTHER COUNSEL IN THE WHITE HOUSE? THE\nANSWER, IN SHORT, IS THAT CERTAIN FUNCTIONS SUCH AS MANAGING --\nFROM A PRESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE -- (1) THE FLOW OF LEGAL MATTERS\nINVOLVED IN PRESIDENTIAL DECISION MAKING, (2) THE PROVIDING OF\nADVICE IN SOME UNIQUELY PRESIDENTIAL MATTERS, AND (3) THE\nEXERCISING OF A GENERAL LEGAL COORDINATION ROLE IN THE EXECUTIVE\nBRANCH ARE BEST DONE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE ITSELF,\nTHE BASIC ROLE OF WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL IS TO MANAGE AND\nOVERSEE LEGAL MATTERS FOR THE PRESIDENT. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,\nTHE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND COUNSEL IN THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS\nAND AGENCIES CAN PROVIDE ADVICE AND SERVICES; BUT THERE IS A NEED\nFOR A FOCAL POINT IN THE WHITE HOUSE TO:\nRAISE AND RECEIVE LEGAL INQUIRIES;\nTRANSMIT THE PROPER QUESTIONS TO THE DEPARTMENTAL LAWYERS;\nEVALUATE THE RESPONSES;\nINTERCEPT FAULTY OR BIASED LEGAL WORK;\nRESOLVE OR NARROW CONFLICTS; AND FINALLY,\nFRAME ANSWERS IN THE APPROPRIATE FORMAT FOR CONSIDERATION\nBY THE PRESIDENT.\nIT IS THE CURRENT WISDOM THAT THIS MUST BE DONE BY LAWYERS WITH A\nUNIQUELY PRESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE,\n-6-\nTURNING TO SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF FUNCTIONS THAT ARE\nPERFORMED BY THE COUNSEL'S OFFICE, I HAVE TRIED TO PLACE THEM IN\nTWO GROUPS: (1) RECURRING ISSUES, AND (2) WHAT I WILL CALL\nSPECIAL PROJECTS,\n(1) RECURRING ISSUES\n- PREVENT COMMERCIAL ABUSE OF PRESIDENTIAL SEAL AND THE\nPRESIDENT'S NAME, LIKENESS, PHOTOGRAPH, SIGNATURE, ETC. (E.G.,\nHEARING AID, AD FOR LAWN FURNITURE),\n- PROVIDE GUIDANCE CONCERNING THE PRESIDENT'S STATUTORY REVIEW\nOF CERTAIN AGENCY ACTIONS: INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS,\nCIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD DECISIONS (NOW WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF\nTRANSPORTATION), FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION ORDERS, ETC.\n- As I HAVE MENTIONED, COMMENT ON ALL ENROLLED BILLS AND,\nWHERE APPROPRIATE, PROVIDE VETO RECOMMENDATIONS. (Farm Bill)\n- REVIEW VARIOUS WHITE HOUSE PAPERS FOR LEGAL SUFFICIENCY --\ndaily\nprequent\nINCLUDING4EXECUTIVE ORDERS, PROCLAMATIONS, REMARKS, DECISION\nMEMORANDA, CABINET PAPERS, ETC. (E.G., RANGING FROM WEIGHTY\nferridars\nMATTERS OF STATE TO PROCLAMATIONS PROCLAIMING WOODEN HANDLED\nKITCHEN UTENSIL WEEK, MUSHROOM WEEK).\n- REVIEW ALL PRESIDENTIAL SPEECHES, PREPARE PRESS CONFERENCE\nMATERIALS, AND PARTICIPATE IN PRE-PRESS CONFERENCE PREPARATION\n(DESCRIBE THE PROCESS),\n- ENSURE COMPLIANCE BY WHITE HOUSE STAFF WITH ANTI-LOBBYING,\nCONFLICT OF INTEREST, ETHICS, TRAVEL, AND OTHER APPLICABLE\nRESTRICTIONS. (I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT ALTHOUGH THERE MAY BE SOME\n\"YES MEN\" IN THE WHITE HOUSE, THE REPUTATION OF THE COUNSEL'S\nOFFICE IS THAT OF \"NO MEN\".)\n-7-\n- PROVIDE PRESS GUIDANCE AND BACKGROUND BRIEFINGS ON LEGAL\nISSUES AND MATTERS UNDER OUR RESPONSIBILITY AT THE REQUEST OF THE\nPRESS OFFICE, E.G., GUIDANCE ON RECENT SUPREME COURT OR OTHER\nDECISIONS,\n- MEMBER OF THE CABINET COUNCIL ON LEGAL POLICY [AG, MEESE,\nSubjet of Full cabinet\nSTOCKMAN CHAIRMAN OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE, AND\nSECRETARIES OF SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS}.\n- PROVIDE ADVICE OF A SOMEWHAT PERSONAL NATURE TO\nTHE FIRST FAMILY\n#\nANNUAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REPORTS\n#\nCOORDINATE FILING AND PROVIDE PRESS BRIEFING ON INCOME\nTAX RETURNS (GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE THE LINE IS DRAWN BETWEEN\nWORK DONE BY COUNSEL'S OFFICE AND THAT DONE BY PRESIDENT'S\nPRIVATE ATTORNEY),\n- LITIGATION\nMONITOR AND SUPERVISE LITIGATION CHALLENGING THE\nPRESIDENT'S PREROGATIVES AND PROGRAMS, E.G.:\n#\nCONSOLDIATED CASES SEEKING TO ENJOIN THE DEPLOYMENT\nOF THE MX/PEACEKEEPER MISSILE SYSTEM. (DESCRIBE PROCESS)\n#\nVARIOUS SUBPOENAS AND DISCOVERY REQUESTS SEEKING WHITE\nHOUSE DOCUMENTS, SEVERAL OF WHICH, INCLUDING WESTMORELAND\nV. CBS, HAVE RAISED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE ISSUES,\n#\nCASE CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF REGULATIONS\nRESTRICTING THE POSTING OF LARGE SIGNS AND THE CONDUCTING\nOF DEMONSTRATIONS ON THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK,\n# FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT/PRIVACY ACT CASES.\n-8-\n- JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS\n# CHAIR FEDERAL JUDICIAL SELECTION COMMITTEE\nA.G. or D.A.G. + various Asit. to the P.\n(ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL,\nASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR LEGAL POLICY, COUNSELLOR\nTO THE PRESIDENT, CHIEF OF STAFF, AND ASSISTANTS TO THE\nPRESIDENT FOR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS, PERSONNEL AND\nPOLITICAL AFFAIRS)? COMMITTEE PROCESSES AND MAKES FINAL\nRECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT ON ALL APPOINTMENTS\nTO SUPREME COURT, FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND DISTRICT COURTS,\nCOURT FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE, U.S. ATTORNEYS AND U.S.\nMARSHALS,\n*\nPROCESS CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE U.S.\nTAX COURT, COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS, AND COURTS\nOF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,\n- PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS\n*\nINITIATE AND REVIEW ALL NECESSARY FBI AND IRS\nBACKGROUND CHECKS,\n*\nASSURE THE PROSPECTIVE APPOINTEE'S COMPLIANCE WITH ALL\nAPPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS INCLUDING THE ETHICS IN\nGOVERNMENT ACT OF 1978 AND COORDINATE CONFLICTS CLEARANCES\nWITH THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS, THE ETHICS\nOFFICIALS FOR THE AGENCY TO WHICH THE PERSON IS BEING\nAPPOINTED, AND APPROPRIATE SENATE COMMITTEES:\n# ASSIST LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS IN CONFIRMATION PROCESS\nAS NEEDED, (E.G., RECENT CONFIRMATION HEARINGS OF\nSECS. BAKER, BENNETT, HERRINGTON AND HODEL)\n-9-\n- ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT\n# AS THE DESIGNATED AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL FOR THE WHITE\nHOUSE OFFICE, RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE\nREPORTS OF WHITE HOUSE STAFF AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE\nWITH ALL LAWS AND REGULATIONS INVOLVING CONFLICTS OF\nINTEREST AND POST-EMPLOYMENT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.\n- ADVISE THE PRESIDENT ON ALL ISSUES RELATING TO EXECUTIVE\nPRIVILEGE, AND PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE ON CONGRESSIONAL REQUESTS FOR\nPRODUCTION OF PRESIDENTIAL OR CABINET COUNCIL DOCUMENTS (E.G.,\nMEESE, EPA AND INTERIOR).\n- WAR POWERS ACT\n#\nCHAIR WORKING GROUP OF REPRESENTATIVES OF DEFENSE,\nSTATE, JUSTICE, NSC.\n- GIFTS\n#\nREVIEW AND DETERMINE THE PROPRIETY OF GIFTS TO\nWHITE HOUSE STAFF (FAMOUS MEESE CUFFLINKS),\n*\nPREPARE AND SUBMIT ANNUAL REPORT TO DEPARTMENT OF\nSTATE ON ALL FOREIGN GIFTS.\n- CONTACTS WITH DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES\n# PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO WHITE HOUSE STAFF ON THE\nPROPRIETY OF CONTACTS WITH INDEPENDENT REGULATORY\nAGENCIES, INVESTIGATIVE AND INTELLIGENCE DEPARTMENTS\nAND AGENCIES, AND PROCUREMENT AGENCIES,\n#\nSERVE AS SOLE CONTACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nWITH REGARD TO ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS, CASES AND LEGAL\n-10-\nOPINIONS AND WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY WITH REGARD\nTO PENDING INVESTIGATIONS AND CASES, AND TAX RETURN\nINFORMATION,\n- POLITICAL ACTIVITY\n#\nPROVIDE LEGAL GUIDANCE TO THE PRESIDENT, THE CABINET,\nAND MEMBERS OF THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF ON ADMINISTRATION\nPOLICY ON POLITICAL ACTIVITIES BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.\nTHIS INCLUDES:\nHATCH ACT;\nREQUESTS FOR PRESIDENTIAL LETTERS FOR POLITICAL\nFUNDRAISERS OR OTHER ACTIVITIES;\nLIAISON WITH THE GENERAL COUNSELS TO THE VARIOUS\nREPUBLICAN PARTY COMMITTEES ON ISSUES INVOLVING\nFUNDRAISING OR OTHER ACTIVITIES BY THE PRESIDENT OR\nHIS STAFF, E.G., REAGAN-BUSH '84.\n(2) SPECIAL PROJECTS\n- CONDUCT AND COORDINATE REVIEWS AND INVESTIGATIONS INTO\nALLEGATIONS OF IMPROPRIETY OR ILLEGALITY BY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES\nOR OTHERS (E.G., RICHARD ALLEN, MEESE)\nBROWN\n- COORDINATE AND WORK WITH NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND\nOTHER INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES ON NATIONAL SECURITY MATTERS,\n- LEGAL ADVICE IN CONNECTION WITH INAUGURAL\n- LIAISON WITH MEESE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, \"DEBATEGATE.\"\nAND, OF COURSE, THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER PROBLEM CASES THAT WERE\nRESOLVED WITHOUT PUBLIC CONTROVERSY.\n-11-\nALTHOUGH MY NO MEANS ALL INCLUSIVE, CONSIDERED TOGETHER THAT\nLONG LIST SOUNDS RATHER OVERWHELMING. I GUESS THE GOOD NEWS IS\nTHAT ONE AREA IN WHICH WE HAVE VERY LITTLE, IF ANY, INVOLVEMENT\nRaGING\nIS THE CURRENTLY ONGOING BUDGET BATTLE. GIVEN THE INTENSITY OF\nHecurrunt\nat\nthe\nW/H\nis that\nTHAT BATTLE,\nIF THE PRESIDENT EVER DOES GET A BUDGET BILL TO\nSIGN, THEY RE SAYING HE'LL HAVE TO DO IT WITH A STEPTIC PENCIL.\nHOPEFULLY, HOWEVER, THAT LONG LIST, AT THE RISK OF SOME BOREDOM,\nDID MAKE THE POINT THAT OUR PRACTICE IS, AT THE VERY LEAST, ONE\nHAVING GREAT VARIETY AND ONE THAT CAN BE FASCINATING. IT IS A\nRARE DAY THAT WE ACTUALLY WORK ON THE MATTERS WE HAD SCHEDULED\nFOR THAT DAY.\nI HAVE OCCASIONALLY REFLECTED ON ONE ADDITIONAL ASPECT OF\nOUR PRACTICE THAT DIFFERS MARKEDLY FROM PRIVATE PRACTICE. LAWYERS\nIN PRIVATE PRACTICE DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO BELIEVE IN THEIR\nCLIENT -- GIVEN THE UNIQUE CLIENT WE HAVE, AS I'M SURE YOU CAN\nAPPRECIATE, BELIEF IS ESSENTIAL,\nLET ME CLOSE WITH AN OBSERVATION REGARDING THE ROTARY CLUB.\nTHIS PRESIDENT, AS YOU KNOW, HAS GIVEN TOP PRIORITY TO PRIVATE\nSECTOR INITIATIVES, HE LOOKS TO THEM AND ENCOURAGES THEM TO ASSUME\nTHE RESPONSIBILITY OF HELPING FELLOW MAN. THIS THEME HAS NEVER\nBEEN MORE IMPORTANT THAN AT THE PRESENT WITH THE EFFORTS TO REDUCE\nMUCH GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT, IN HIS FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, HE SAID:\nTHOSE WHO SAY WE ARE IN A TIME WHEN THERE\nARE NO HEROES JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE TO LOOK.\nIN CASE YOU DON'T KNOW, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT ORGANIZATIONS SUCH\nAS YOURS AND PEOPLE SUCH AS YOU,\nTHANK YOU,\nfile-\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nCommle\nOffice\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 11, 1985\nMEMOPANDUM FOR DONALD T. REGAN\nCHIEF-OF-STAFF DESIGNATE\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nRequest for Briefing Materials (1/11/85)\nAttached for your week-end review is an outline of the general\nareas of responsibilities handled by me and my office. This\nwill be supplemented on Monday by a listing of current\nsubstantive matters of which you should be aware.\nOUTLINE - AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY\nOFFICE OF THE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nI. RECURRING ISSUES\n-\nProvide guidance concerning Presidential review\nof agency action, where provided by statute:\nInternational Trade Commission decisions, Civil\nAeronautics Board decisions (now within the\nDepartment of Transportation), Federal Maritime\nCommission orders, etc.\n-\nPrevent commercial abuse of Presidential Seal and\nthe President's name, likeness, photograph, signature,\netc.\n-\nComment on enrolled bills and provide veto recommenda-\ntions, with special attention to effect on President's\nlegal powers.\n-\nReview White House papers for legal sufficiency,\nincluding executive orders, proclamations, remarks,\ndecision memoranda, Cabinet papers, etc.\n-\nReview Presidential speeches, public statements,\nprepare press conference materials; participate in\nPresident's pre-press conference preparation.\n-\nProvide press guidance on Supreme Court or other\njudicial decisions.\n-\nEnsure compliance by White House staff with anti-\nlobbying, conflict of interest, ethics, travel, and\nother applicable restrictions.\n-\nDetermine the President's obligations under the Railway\nLabor Act and related statutes and prepare necessary\ndocuments to create Emergency Boards.\n-\nProvide press guidance and background briefings on\nlegal issues and matters under our responsibility\nat the request of the Press Office.\npage 2\n-\nParticipate in Legislative Strategy Group (LSG)\nmeetings.\n-\nMember of the Cabinet Council on Legal Policy.\n-\nParticipate in personnel meetings on controversial\nPresidential appointment candidates; presentations\nto the President where necessary.\nFirst Family\nfinancial disclosure statements\ncoordinate filing and provide press briefing on\nincome tax returns (preparation done by private\ncounsel)\nchildren\nassistance, handling and reporting of gifts\nspecial assignments\nLitigation\nMonitor and supervise litigation challenging the\nPresident's prerogatives and programs, e.g.:\nconsolidated cases seeking to enjoin the development\nof the MX/Peacekeeper Missile System.\nvarious subpoenas and discovery requests seeking\nWhite House and/or Executive Office of the\nPresident documents, several of which, including\nWestmoreland V. CBS, have raised Executive privilege\nissues.\ncase challenging the constitutionality of regula-\ntions restricting the posting of large signs and the\nconducting of demonstrations on the White House\nsidewalk.\nFreedom of Information Act/Privacy Act cases.\nJudicial selection process\nchair Federal Judicial Selection Committee comprised\nof the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General,\nAssistant Attorney General for Legal Policy,\nCounsellor to the President, Chief of Staff, and\nAssistants to the President for Legislative Affairs,\nPersonnel and Political Affairs. Committee\nprocesses all appointments to United States Circuit\nand District Courts, Court for International Trade,\nand Claims Court, U.S. Attorneys and U.S. Marshals.\npage 3\nprocess candidates for appointment to the U.S. Tax\nCourt, Court of Military Appeals, and Courts of the\nDistrict of Columbia.\nPresidential Appointments\ninitiate and review all necessary FBI and IRS back-\nground checks.\nassure compliance with all applicable laws and\nregulations including the Ethics in Government Act\nof 1978 and coordinate conflicts clearances with\nthe Office of Government Ethics, designated agency\nethics officials and appropriate Senate Committees.\nassist Legislative Affairs in confirmation process\nas needed.\n-\nAdvise the President on all issues relating to\nExecutive privilege, and provide legal advice on\nCongressional requests for production of Presidential\nor Cabinet Counsel documents.\n-\nWar Powers Act\nchair working group of representatives of Defense,\nState, Justice, NSC.\nmember of legislative negotiating team\n(e.g. : Lebanon resolutions).\n-\nEthics in Government Act\nas the Designated Agency Ethics Official for the\nWhite House Office, responsible for reviewing\nfinancial disclosure statements of White House\nstaff and assuring compliance with all laws and\nregulations involving conflicts of interest and\npost-employment conflicts of interest.\n-\nGifts\nreview and determine the propriety of gifts to White\nHouse staff.\nprepare and submit annual report to Department of\nState on all foreign gifts.\npage 4\nContacts with Departments and Agencies\nprovide guidance to White House staff on the\npropriety of contacts with independent regulatory\nagencies, investigative and intelligence departments\nand agencies, and procurement agencies.\nserve as sole contact with the Department of Justice\nwith regard to investigations, cases and lega\nopinions and Department of Treasury with regard\nto pending investigations and cases, rulings on\npending applications, regulatory actions, and tax\nreturn information.\nSecurity Office: unit of the Counsel's Office\nresponsible for initiating and evaluating reports of\nall White House and EOB passholders; processing\nrequests for special security clearances; maintaining\nliaison with department and agency security offices.\n-\nPolitical Activity\nprovide legal guidance to the President, the\nCabinet, and members of the White House staff on\nAdministration policy on political activities\nby Government officials. This includes:\n-Hatch Act;\n-legal review of all requested Presidential\nletters for political fundraisers or other\nactivities;\n-liaison with the general counsels to the\nvarious Republican party committees on issues\ninvolving fundraising or other activities\nby the President or his staff.\npage 5\nII. SPECIAL PROJECTS\n-\nConduct and coordinate reviews and investigations\ninto allegations of impropriety or illegality by\ngovernment employees or others.\n-\nCoordinate and work with National Security Council\nand other intelligence agencies on national\nsecurity matters.\n-\nExtraterritoriality\nspecial meetings and negotiations with members\nof Prime Minister's Cabinet, delegations, and\nUSG.\n-\nSuit brought by Nicaragua against the United States\nin International Court of Justice.\n-\nLegal advice in connection with:\nEconomic Summit\nReagan-Bush '84\nInaugural (currently the Counsel serves as General\nCounsel for the Committee)\n-\nNegotiate resolutions of Executive privilege\ncontroversies.\nCurrent negotiations: Grassley Subcommittee re:\nDepartment of Justice/General Dynamics documents.\nPast negotiations: EPA, Interior.\n-\nFormulate policy issues (e.g.: school prayer, tuition\ntax credits, abortion, \"Baby Doe\")\n-\nNational security, intelligence matters (e.g.: NSDD 84\non classified leaks, Executive Orders on\nclassification, PFIAB, PIOB)\n-\nSpecial problems (e.g.: liaison with Meese independent\ncounsel, Donovan/FBI confirmation controversy, \"Debate-\ngate\"). This includes, of course, problem cases that\nwere resolved without public controversy.\npage 6\nIII. LIAISON\n-\nAmerican Bar Association\n-\nChief Justice of the Supreme Court\n-\nDistrict of Columbia Government\n-\nNational Bar Association\n-\nFederal Bar Association\n-\nOffice of Government Ethics\n-\nInspectors General\n-\nChief Judges\n-\nGeneral Counsels\nIV. CURRENT ISSUES\nWill provide detailed information."
}