Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
135839208
label
JGR/Pro Bono (18 of 18)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
135839208
contentType
document
title
JGR/Pro Bono (18 of 18)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
485
collections
Records of the Office of Counsel to the President (Reagan Administration)
John Roberts' Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
135839208
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1986-12-31
year
1986
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1982-01-01
year
1982
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e73568a7b49bc504
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Roberts, John G.: Files
Folder Title: JGR/Pro Bono (18 of 18)
Box: 45
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 25, 1985
MEMORANDUM FOR FRED F. FIELDING
FROM:
JOHN G. ROBERTS offer
SUBJECT:
Request for Remarks About Charles Kuralt
to be Published in "On the Road with Charles
Kuralt"
The publisher of a forthcoming book by Charles Kuralt has
written the President to ask that he "contribute a few words
about Charles for use in our publicity, promotion, and
advertising." The attached draft reply for your signature
advises the publisher that White House policy precludes such
commercial endorsements by the President.
Attachment
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 25, 1985
Dear Mr. Nyren:
Thank you for your letter of February 11 to the President.
That letter described a forthcoming book by Charles Kuralt,
and requested that the President contribute a few words
concerning Mr. Kuralt for use in promoting the book.
Please be advised that established White House policy
generally prohibits any use of the name, likeness, photo-
graph, or signature of the President in any manner that
suggests or could be construed as endorsement of a com-
mercial product or enterprise. Adherence to this policy
requires us to decline your request. I trust you will
understand that our response is in no sense an adverse
reflection on Mr. Kuralt.
Sincerely,
Orig. signed by FFF
Fred F. Fielding
Counsel to the President
(a great fan ap mr.
Kuralt)!
Mr. Neil S. Nyren
Senior Editor
The Putnam Publishing Group
200 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10016
FFF: JGR:aea 2/25/85
bcc: FFFielding
JGRoberts
Subj
Chron
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 25, 1985
Dear Mr. Nyren:
Thank you for your letter of February 11 to the President.
That letter described a forthcoming book by Charles Kuralt,
and requested that the President contribute a few words
concerning Mr. Kuralt for use in promoting the book.
Please be advised that established White House policy
generally prohibits any use of the name, likeness, photo-
graph, or signature of the President in any manner that
suggests or could be construed as endorsement of a com-
mercial product or enterprise. Adherence to this policy
requires us to decline your request. I trust you will
understand that our response is in no sense an adverse
reflection on Mr. Kuralt.
Sincerely,
Fred F. Fielding
Counsel to the President
Mr. Neil S. Nyren
Senior Editor
The Putnam Publishing Group
200 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10016
FFF: JGR:aea 2/25/85
bcc: FFFielding
JGRoberts
Subj
Chron
If
ID# 288742
THE WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEFT
PP,014-08
INCOMING
JR
DATE PFCFIVFD: FFBRUARY 14, 1985
NAME OF CORRESPONDENT: MR. NEIL S. NYREN
SUBJECT: REQUESTS PEMAPKS ABOUT CHARLES KURALT TO BE
PUBLISHED IN NEW BOOK, ON THE ROAD WITH
CHARLES KURALT
ACTION
DISPOSITION
ROUTE TO:
ACT
DATE
TYPE C COMPLETED
OFFICE/AGENCY (STAFF NAME)
CODE YY/MM/DD RESP D YY/MM/DD
ANNE FIGGINS
ORG 85/02/14
/ /
RFFERRAL NOTE:
PD
m. Beroudy
A 85/02/19
7
7
REFERRAL NOTF:
D. Holland
20 I 85/02/19
/
/
RFFERPAL NOTF:
WAT 18
D 85102119
585/03/01
RFFFRRAL NOTF:
/ 7
7
RFFFRRAL NOTE:
COMMENTS:
ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENTS:
MEDIA:L INDIVIDUAL CODES:
MI MAIL
USER CODES: (A)
(B)
(C)
*ACTION CODFS:
*DISPOSITION CODFS:
*OUTCOING
*
*
*
* CORRESPONDENCE:
*
*A-APPROPPIATE ACTION
*A-ANSWERED
*TYPE RESP=INITIALS
*
*C-COMMENT/RECOM
*B-NON-SPFC-REFFRRAL
*
OF SIGNER *
*D-DRAFT RESPONSE
*C-COMPLETED
*
CODE = A
*
*F-FURNISH FACT SHEFT *S-SUSPENDED
*COMPLETED = DATE OF
*
*I-INFO COPY/NO ACT NFC*
*
OUTGOING
*
*R-DIRFCT REPLY W/COPY *
*
*
*S-FOR-SIGNATURE
*
*
*
*X-INTFRIM REPLY
*
*
*
RFFFR QUESTIONS AND POUTING UPDATFS TO CFNTPAL PFFFPENCE
(ROOM 75, ,OFOB) FXT. 2590
KFFP THIS WORKSHEET ATTACHED TO THF ORIGINAL INCOMING
LETTEP AT ALL TIMES AND SFND COMPLETED RECORD TO RFCORDS
MANAGEMENT.
THE PUTNAM PUBLISHING GROUP
200 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10016 (212)576-8900 . TELEX 42-2386 COMAGEN
AH
February 11, 1985
President Ronald Reagan
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear President Reagan,
I am delighted to be publishing a book by a very special man
this fall: Charles Kuralt's ON THE ROAD WITH CHARLES KURALT.
No one else writes quite the same kind of story he does --
the warm, funny, open-hearted explorations of America and
Americans he has been giving us since 1967 -- stories from
the backroads, "Where there is room for diversity and the
occurrence of small miracles," that tell us something not
only about the people he portrays, but about ourselves and
this infinite and various country.
His book will gather together the best of his pieces, both
long and short. Here you'll find the Missouri doctor whose
fee is a Mason jar of buttermilk or sometimes just a handshake;
the wiliest horse trader in Texas; the last of the authentic
Alaskan pioneers; the town that invented its own language to
bamboozle tourists ("If a brightlighter come in, you want to
harp a little narchness on him, you know") ; the world-class
croquet player from back-country Kentucky; the men who built
the Golden Gate Bridge; the poet of steam engines ("You lean
on the arm rest and see smoke trail back over the train and
see that headlight shining out there and hear that ole girl
talk to you in the language just you and she understand ..);
and the Spivey family of Blackfoot, Idaho: Jerry, Terry,
Sherry, Merry, Kerry, Cherry, Perry, Zerry, Berry -- and
Joe. Here are blacksmiths, moonshiners, auctioneers, prospectors,
boatbuilders, fishermen, dreamer, heroes and eccentrics --
all evidence that, as Kuralt says, "Americans are up to all
sorts of surprising things. You never know what -- until
you go out and take a look."
G. PUTNAM'S SONS
COWARD-McCANN
-
GROSSET & DUNLAP
PACER
PERIGEE
PHILOMEL
PLATT & MUNK
We don't yet have galleys of his book, but I know you are
familiar with his work and his unique style. Would it be
possible for you to contribute a few words about Charles for
use in our publicity, promotion and advertising? I realize
your schedule is busy, but I know how much your support
would mean in bringing the book to the attention of its
audience. If you need material on which to comment, please
let me know and I'll be glad to put some together for you.
Thank you very much for your time and attention -- and I
look forward to hearing from you.
Best,
Wallyn Neil S. Nyren
Senior Editor
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 26, 1985
MEMORANDUM FOR LINAS KOJELIS
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF PUBLIC LIAISON
FROM:
JOHN G. ROBERTS 22R
ASSOCIATE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Letter from Balys Rackauskas Regarding
U.S. Foreign Policy and Proposed State
Department Reply
As we have discussed, Counsel's Office has reviewed the
proposed State Department reply to Balys Rackauskas, and
finds no objection to it from a legal perspective.
ID #
294513
CU
Gg
IM
WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
o - OUTGOING
+ - INTERNAL
JR-Ann
INCOMING
Date Correspondence
Received (YY/MM/DD)
Name of Correspondent: Linas Kaseles, DPL
MI Mail Report
User Codes: (A)
(B)
(C)
Subject: letter from Bayes Rachaushar ugarding
u.s. Foreign policy state Dept draft
includes extended reference to hare Lennas'
case
ROUTE TO:
ACTION
DISPOSITION
Tracking
Type
Completion
Action
Date
of
Date
IDffice/Agency
(Staff Name)
Code
YY/MM/DD
Response
Code
YY/MM/DD
CUTTOU
ORIGINATOR
DDV 85,02,08
/
/
Referral Note:
CUAT 18
R
85102111
5851021
Referral Note: DDJ
1
1
1
/
Referral Note:
T
Referral Note:
/
/
/
/
Referral Note:
ACTION CODES:
DISPOSITION CODES:
A . Appropriate Action
1 - Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary
A. Answered
c Completed
C - Comment/Recommendation
R . Direct Reply w/Copy
Non-Special Referral
S Suspended
D - Draft Response
S . For Signature
F - Furnish Fact Sheet
X Interim Reply
to be used as Enclosure
FOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:
Type of Response - Initials of Signer
Code
=
"A"
Completion Date - Date of Outgoing
Comments: See ID: 281614
Keep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.
Send all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).
Always return completed correspondence record to Central Files.
Refer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.
5/81
294513cu
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
7
February
6, 1985 this
MEMORANDUM FOR JOHN ROBERTS
OGC
FROM:
LINAS KOJELIS, OPL
SUBJECT:
Correspondence from Balys Rackauskas
John, the attached letter from Mr. Balys Rackauskas regarding
U.S. foreign policy was forwarded to the State Department for a
draft reply. As you will note, however, the draft includes
extended reference to the Karl Linnas case. I thought you should
take a look at it before it goes out.
PLKOJE
UNCLASSIFIED
(CLASSIFICATION)
S/S # 8500538
DATE January 31, 1985
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
TRANSMITTAL FORM
FOR: Mr. Robert C. McFarlane
National Security Council
The White House
REFERENCE:
TO: President Reagan
FROM:
Mr. Balys Rackauskas
DATE: January 1, 1985
SUBJECT: Deportation Case
of Mr. Karl Linnas
WHITE HOUSE REFERRAL DATED: 1/9/85
NSC # 271614
THE ATTACHED ITEM WAS SENT DIRECTLY
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ACTION TAKEN:
X
A draft reply is attached
A draft reply will be forwarded
A translation is attached
An information copy of a direct reply is attached
We believe no response is necessary for the reason
cited below
Other
REMARKS:
Hunders Nicholas Plat
Executive Secretary
UNCLASSIFIED
(CLASSIFICATION)
SUGGESTED REPLY
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
Dear Mr. Rackauskas:
I am replying to your recent message to President
Reagan regarding the deportation of a former citizen of the
Baltic States to the Soviet Union. I believe you are
referring to the case of Mr. Karl Linnas.
Mr. Linnas was stripped of his U.S. citizenship by a
federal district court in July 1981, inter alia, on the
basis of the court's specific finding that he "did not
possess the required good moral character because of his
voluntary involvement in the unjustifiable atrocities com-
mitted against men, women, and children a relatively short
period of time prior to his entry into this country." United
States V. Linnas, 527 F. Supp. 426, 439 (E.D.N.Y. 1981).
Mr. Linnas was found to have been an active, ranking member
of the Selbstschutz, the Estonian "self-help" organization
which carried out most of the arrests and executions of Jews
in Estonia, and to have been head of the concentration camp
at Tartu in 1941. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit affirmed the judgment of denaturalization, and the
U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the matter.
Mr. Balys Rackauskas,
President,
Association of Lithuanian American
University Professors,
621 Wellington Avenue,
Chicago, Illinois.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
- 2 -
A U.S. immigration judge concluded on May 19, 1983 that
Mr. Linnas was deportable, denied him relief from deporta-
tion, and designated the Soviet Union as a country of
deportation. On July 31, 1984, the Board of Immigration
Appeals (PIA), affirmed the immigration judge's decision in
substantial part but remanded the case for consideration of
"the implications of the United States' refusal to recognize
the Soviet annexation of Estonia," designation of a country
of deportation, and articulation of the statutory basis for
selection of the country designated. In re Karl Linnas,
BIA, slip opinion at 16-17.
The handling of denaturalization and deportation pro-
ceedings by the United States against alleged Nazi perse-
cutors is the responsibility of the Office of Special In-
vestigations of the Criminal Division cf the Department of
Justice. As the Linnas case is in litigation, we suggest
that specific questions relating to the case be directed to
that office.
As to whether the deportation of Mr. Linnas to the USSR
would be inconsistent with our long-standing policy of
non-recognition of the forcible incorporation of the Baltic
states by the Soviet Union, the Department of Justice has
taken the position that deportation of Mr. Linnas would take
place under section 243 (a) (7) of the Immigration and Nation-
ality Act, 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1253 (a) (7). That section directs
deportation to "any country which is willing to accept such
alien into its territory. " Under that section, Mr. Linnas
- 3 -
would be deported to the Soviet Union solely as a "country
willing to accept" him and not in any other capacity, i.e.,
not as his country of nationality or citizenship. On the
basis of this position, the Department of State has conclud-
ed deportation of Mr. Linnas under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1253 (a) (7)
tc the Soviet Union would not, as a matter of law, contra-
vene the lorg-standing and firmly held U.S. policy of non-
recognition of the forcible incorporation of Estonia into
the Soviet Union. WE strongly adhere to that policy and be-
lieve it is unaffected by deportation as described above.
As noted above, for further details on the case you may
wish to contact the Department of Justice. However, if we
can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact
us.
Sincerely,
8500538
THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE
REFERRAL
JANUARY 9, 1985
TO: DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ACTION REQUESTED:
DRAFT REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF WHITE HOUSE STAFF MEMBER
DESCRIPTION OF INCOMING:
ID:
271614
MEDIA: MAILGRAM, DATED JANUARY 1, 1985
TO:
PRESIDENT REAGAN
FROM:
MR. BALYS RACKAUSKAS
PRESIDENT
ASSOCIATION OF LITHUANIAN AMERICAN
UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS
621 WELLINGTON AVENUE
CHICAGO IL 60657
SUBJECT: SUPPORTS SPACE DEFENSE, EXPRESSES CONCERN
REGARDING THE DEPORTATION OF A FORMER BALTIC
STATES CITIZEN TO SOVIET RUSSIA
PROMPT ACTION IS ESSENTIAL -- IF REQUIRED ACTION HAS NOT BEEN
TAKEN WITHIN 9 WORKING DAYS OF RECEIPT, PLEASE TELEPHONE THE
UNDERSIGNED AT 456-7486.
RETURN CORRESPONDENCE, WORKSHEET AND COPY OF RESPONSE
(OR DRAFT) TO:
AGENCY LIAISON, ROOM 91, THE WHITE HOUSE
SALLY KELLEY
DIRECTOR OF AGENCY LIAISON
PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE
ID# 271614
THE WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
INCOMING
DATE RECEIVED: JANUARY 02, 1985
NAME OF CORRESPONDENT: MR. BALYS RACKAUSKAS
SUBJECT SUPPORTS SPACE DEFENSE, EXPRESSES CONCERN
REGARDING THE DEPORTATION OF A FORMER BALTIC
STATES CITIZEN TO SOVIET RUSSIA
ACTION
DISPOSITION
ROUTE TO:
ACT
DATE
TYPE C COMPLETED
OFFICE/AGENCY (STAFF NAME)
CODE YY/MM/DD RESP D YY/MM/DD
LINAS KOJELIS
ORG 85/01/02
REFERRAL NOTE:
99 DOS DOS
/ / / /
REFERRAL NOTE:
D 2851011070,
7 /
/ /
REFERRAL NOTE:
/ /
/ /
REFERRAL NOTE:
/ /
/ /
REFERRAL NOTE:
COMMENTS:
ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENTS:
MEDIA:M INDIVIDUAL CODES:
PL MAIL
USER CODES: (A)
(B)
(C)
*ACTION CODES:
*DISPOSITION CODES:
*OUTGOING
*
*
*
* CORRESPONDENCE:
*
*A-APPROPRIATE ACTION
*A-ANSWERED
*TYPE RESP=INITIALS
*
*C-COMMENT/RECOM
*B-NON-SPEC-REFERRAL
*
OF SIGNER
*
*D-DRAFT RESPONSE
*C-COMPLETED
*
CODE = A
*
*F-FURNISH FACT SHEET
*S-SUSPENDED
*COMPLETED = DATE OF
*
*I-INFO COPY/NO ACT NEC*
*
OUTGOING
*
*R-DIRECT REPLY W/COPY *
*
*
*S-FOR-SIGNATURE
*
*
*
*X-INTERIM REPLY
*
*
*
REFER QUESTIONS AND ROUTING UPDATES TO CENTRAL REFERENCE
(ROOM 75,OEOB) EXT. 2590
KETTERHAG NORKONEES ANDASHED TOMPHETOBIGENARD INCOCGRDS
MANAGEMENT.
BALYS RACKAUSKAS
50
621 "ELLINGTON AVE
CHICAGO IL 60657 01AM
ma
1-0009055001 01/01/85 ICS IPMBNGZ CSP WHSC
#271614
3124724347 MGMB TDBN CHICAGC IL 192 01-01 0249A EST
League
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN
WHITE HOUSE
8500538
WASHINGTON DC 20500
DEAR MR PRESIDENT
OVER A YEAR AGO WE IMPLORED YOU TO RUN FCR PRESIDENCY AGAIN AND WE
ARE GRATEFUL YOU DID. WE PREDICTED A LANCSLIDE AND IT WAS, THANK YOU
FOR HONORING US WITH A THOUGHTFUL LETTER. AMERICA IS IN SAFE HANDS
AGAINs YOUR SPACE DEFENSE IS WORKING IN roscow AND GENEVA. THE
STATEMENTS OF THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS - THE OLD CHARLES
RIVER GANG - ARE NOT HONEST, IT'S GOOD YCU ARE KEEPING MR. WEINBERGER
AND PROFESSOR SCHULIZ. SINCE FRANKLIN ROCSEVELT EVERY PRESIDENT
DECLARED THAT THE UNITED STATES WILL NEVER RECOGNIZE DEOCCUPATION OF
LITHLANIA, LATVIA AND ESTONIA. WE RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT SOME
LEFTISTS IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ARE PRESSURNG THE STATE DEPARTMENT
TO BREAK THIS WHOLLY NON-RECOGNITION PRINCIPLE IN ORDER TO DEPORT A
FORMER BALTIC STATES CITIZEN TO SOVIET RLSSIA. WE KINDLY ASK YOU TO
LOOK INTC THIS MATTER. WE WISH YOU MR. PRESIDENT AND DEAR NANCY
HEALTH AND HAPPINESS FOR NEW YEAR, A GREAT INAUGURATION AND FAMOUS
YEARS IN HISTORY REMEMBERING YOU AS THE GLOBAL SHIELD,
BALYS RACKAUSKAS, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF LITHUANIAN AMERICAN
UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS
621 WELLINGTON AVE
CHICAGO IL 60657
02:50 EST
MGMCCMP
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 26, 1985
Dear Mr. Greene:
This is written in response to your letter of January 23 to
the President. In that letter you noted that James D.
Cullen had been indicted by a Federal grand jury, and you
requested that the President intercede on his behalf.
Please be advised that it would be inappropriate and contrary
to established White House policy for the President or any
member of the White House staff to interfere in a pending
criminal prosecution. Accordingly, no action is being taken
in response to your request. I trust you will understand
the reasons for this response.
Sincerely,
Johnspohnt
John G. Roberts
Associate Counsel to the President
Mr. Richard E. Greene
Post Office Box 8397
St. Louis, Missouri 63132
293933
ID #.
CU
Dg
JL003
WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
o . OUTGOING
H . INTERNAL
I . INCOMING
Date Correspondence
Received (YY/MM/DD)
Name of Correspondent: Richard E. Dreen
MI Mail Report
User Codes: (A)
(B)
(C)
Subject: Indictment of James D. Cullen, Esquere, by
the St, Louis Federal Drand Jury
ROUTE TO:
ACTION
DISPOSITION
Tracking
Type
Completion
Action
Date
of
Date
Office/Agency
(Staff Name)
Code
YY/MM/DD
Response
Code
YY/MM/DD
CUHOLL
ORIGINATOR 85,02
/
Referral Note:
CUAT 18
R
85102107
the
85102117
BU
Referral Note:
/
1
1
Referral Note:
/
Referral Note:
/
f
Referral Note:
ACTION CODES:
DISPOSITION CODES:
A
Appropriate Action
info Copy Only/No Action Necessary
A Answered
c Completed
i Comment/Recomimendation
R Direct Repiew/Copy
B Non-Special Referral
S Suspended
Draft Response
S For Signature
Furnish Fact Sheet
x Interim Reply
to be used as Enclosure
FOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:
Type of Response - Initials of Signer
Code = "A"
Completion Date - Date of Outgoing
Comments:
Keep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.
Send all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).
Always return completed correspondence record to Central Files.
Refer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.
5/81
icnara
SINCE 1958
293933 cu
1235 RESEARCH BLVD.
11882 W. 91st ST.
Greene CO.
P.O. BOX 8397
OVERLAND PARK, KS. 66214
ST. LOUIS, MO. 63132
PHONE: 913 492-6886
PHONE: 314 994-0222
TELEX: 42-6369
TELEX: 44-2302
NDUSTRIAL CONTROLS
SALES
SERVICE
STOCK
Fred Fulling
January 23, 1985
President Ronald Reagan
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20013-9998
My Dear Mr. President:
I have been a supporter of yours from the very
beginning.
I believe in the America that you do and am fighting
my bottom off to keep the Socialist from further
erosion of my liberties. Now I need your support.
James D. Cullen, a lawyer, and a close and life
long friend of mine, has been indicted by the St. Louis
Federal Grand Jury.
Jim Cullen is of the highest character and has been
caught up in a situation which is not of his making.
I need the situation looked into and his name cleared
as a tragedy could occur if justice isn't done for Jim.
Won't you please look into this situation and inter-
cede on his behalf?
I am looking forward to hearing from you in reference
to this situation.
Sincerely,
RICHARD GREENE COMPANY
Richard E. Greene
REG:sw
INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS
SALES
SERVICE
STOCK
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 26, 1985
MEMORANDUM FOR MICHAEL E. BAROODY
DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
DIRECTOR, PUBLIC AFFAIRS
FROM:
ASSOCIATE COUNSEL DR TO THE PRESIDENT
JOHN G. ROBERTS
SUBJECT:
Questions and Answers for
National Wildlife Magazine
Counsel's Office has reviewed the above-referenced questions
and answers, and finds no objection to them from a legal
perspective. On page 4, line 7, should "specie" be
"species"?
CC: David L. Chew
ID #.
CU
WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
0 . OUTGOING
H . INTERNAL
J . INCOMING
Date Correspondence
Received (YY/MM/DD)
1
Name of Correspondent: Dowed R. Chew
MI Mail Report
User Codes: (A)
(B)
(C)
Subject:
QA for national wildlife magazine
ROUTE TO:
ACTION
DISPOSITION
Tracking
Type
Completion
Action
Date
of
Date
Office/Agency
(Staff Name)
Code
YY/MM/DD
Response
Code
YY/MM/DD
CUHOLL
ORIGINATOR 85,02,25
1
/
Referral Note:
CUAT 18
R 85,02,25
5 85,02,26
Referral Note:
2pm
1 /
I 1
Referral Note:
/
Referral Note:
1
/
I
Referral Note:
ACTION CODES:
DISPOSITION CODES:
A . Appropriate Action
A Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary
A Answered
c Completed
c . Comment/Recommendation
R - Direct Reply w/Copy
. Non-Special Referral
S Suspended
D - Draft Response
IS For Signature
F - Furnish Fact Sheet
X . Interim Reply
to be used as Enclosure
FOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:
Type of Response - Initials of Signer
Code - "A"
Completion Date = Date of Outgoing
Comments:
Keep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.
Send all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).
Always return completed correspondence record to Central Files.
Refer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.
5/81
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
2/25/85
DATE:
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: 2:00 TOMORROW 2/26
Q&A FOR NATIONAL WILDLIFE MAGAZINE
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MURPHY
MEESE
OGLESBY
P
REGAN
ROGERS
DEAVER
SPEAKES
STOCKMAN
SVAHN
CHEW
P
S
VERSTANDIG
FIELDING
WHITTLESEY
FULLER
KINGON
BUCHANAN
TUTTLE
HICKEY
ROLLINS
McFARLANE
FRIEDERSDORF
BAROODY
McMANUS
REMARKS:
Please provide any edits/comments directly to Mike Baroody by 2:00 p.m.
tomorrow, with an information copy to my office.
Thank you.
RESPONSE:
David L. Chew
1985 FEB 25 FII 5: 43
Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
February 25, 1985
Questions & Answers for National Wildlife Magazine
by President Ronald Reagan
1Q: You've often spoken eloquently of the "shining city on a
hill" when talking about the future you see for America.
Isn't clean air and water, better stewardship of the land, a
sane energy policy, and safeguarding our precious wildlife
resources an essential part of the picture?
A: Absolutely, America's fantastic economic recovery has been
achieved without sacrificing the wildlife, scenic grandeur,
and other environmental values. In fact, these values have
been enhanced through such initiatives as the billion dollar
park restoration and improvement program, the great surge in
private sector contributions of time, land, money, and
equipment to the parks and wildlife refuge systems, several
exciting fishery restoration projects, and the Chesapeake
Bay recovery effort -- just to name a few. During my
second Administration, we're going to continue to enhance
our stewardship of all these resources.
2Q: Of all the major environmental problems facing us in this
country today, which do you consider the most pressing? And
how will your Administration address the issue?
A: Well, there are several pressing environmental problems that
we must address, and are addressing. Certainly we are going
to be aggressive in the identification and the cleanup of
toxic waste sites -- that has a top priority. We give a
very high priority to determining the cause, and identifying
effective ways to cope with the detrimental effects of "acid
rain" on our lakes, forests and other natural resources.
But we're not prepared to propose a program for solving the
problem until we know more about it and are sure we have the
right program for dealing with "acid rain."
3Q: Of the thousands of toxic dumps listed by the EPA as
dangerous, only a handful are being cleaned up, in spite of
Superfund. Both Bill Ruckelshaus, former EPA Administrator,
and Lee Thomas, your present Administrator, feel much more
money is going to be needed. Will you support a $10 billion
fund in order to get the job done faster and help people
feel safer?
A: In my last two State of the Union Addresses, I committed
this Administration to support for Superfund reauthorization.
Last Friday, February 22, I sent to the Congress proposed
-2-
legislation to keep that commitment. The bill would more
than triple the size of the Superfund program -- from
$1.6 billion to $5.3 billion over the next five years. The
EPA has estimated that it cannot prudently spend more than
$1 billion per year, so this proposal represents the optimum
funding level from a management perspective.
In addition to the expansion of the Superfund, we have
requested increased enforcement authority to ensure that
responsible parties either conduct or pay for the cleanup
of hazardous waste sites that endanger public health or the
environment. We will also seek to guarantee a larger role
for affected citizens and the States, and expand authority
to respond to emergencies.
We have to move forward aggressively to eliminate the health
and environmental risks associated with past waste disposal
practices.
To help ensure prompt enactment of responsible legislation,
I have instructed Lee Thomas, Administrator of the EPA, to
make reauthorization of this important legislation his
highest priority.
4Q: Many of your Administration's environmental policies seem
directed toward changing the role of the Federal government
in protecting the environment. What do you believe is the
appropriate role of the government in environmental
protection?
A: Now let me stress that I believe one of the most important
responsibilities of modern government is protection of the
environment -- air, water, wildlife, parks and so forth.
But let's remember that in our country there are several
levels of government. What we have sought to do, and what
we have accomplished, is to restore the partnership of the
Federal government with the states in protection of the
environment. Some of these protections require Federal
leadership because, if a problem is not dealt with
adequately in one state, the problem "flows," so-to-speak,
into neighboring states.
There are many environmental and resource protection
measures, however, that are better and more effectively
handled by states or localities without the Federal
government dictating terms or paying the costs. It has
always amazed me that some people think a bureaucrat sitting
behind a desk in our Nation's Capital is always better
qualified to manage a resource than a state official in
-3-
California or Alaska or Michigan or local conservation
officer wherever the resource might be located. We have
been trying to restore the principle that the Federal
government should take the lead in providing the
environmental protections, and managing natural resources,
where the national interest is involved, and that the states
and localities should shoulder the responsibilities where
they can and should be doing the job. That Federalist
principle is a sound one and it can lessen our reliance
on overly restrictive, overly costly and often totally
inappropriate Federal regulations.
5Q: If states are given the responsibility for setting
environmental standards, isn't there a possibility that
many will enter into competition for new or relocated
industry by reducing stringent environmental controls?
A: That is a legitimate concern in some cases. We support
and are enforcing the laws that require states to establish
and police environmental standards that provide an adequate
level of protection. Surface mining regulation is one
instance where Congress says the states must meet certain
standards, and the Federal government must intervene if
they don't. We have intervened -- taken over two state
programs -- when they failed to live up to the standards
established under the Federal strip mining law. But
we think in most instances the states should enforce
environmental protection programs, and should have
reasonable flexibility to tailor regulations to adjust
to the situations within the individual states.
6Q: The Endangered Species Act requires that the habitat
needs of certain troubled species take precedence over
Federal authorized development. Do you believe that water
development projects, as one example, should be modified or
even cancelled when necessary to protect the habitat of an
endangered species?
A: The quick answer to your question is yes. The Endangered
Species Act provides for Federal activities to be carried
out so that endangered species are not jeopardized. Under
the conditions you state in your question -- where it is the
only alternative available to protect the habitat of an
endangered specie -- suitable modification to project plans,
or, if necessary, cancellation of a project may be
appropriate.
-4-
As you are aware, the Act as amended does provide the
Congressional consideration of waivers to the requirements
of the Act in cases of apparent unresolvable conflict.
However, this provision has been little used. Under
provisions of the consultation process, satisfactory
alternatives have in most cases been identified that protect
the specie and permit the project to go through. We believe
that sound planning and active public involvement, can
minimize conflicts and, in most cases, resolve them to
provide the needed water development while protecting rare
species.
7Q: When you go to Canada next week to meet with Prime Minister
Mulroney, the number one topic may be acid rain. We
understand that the Prime Minister has gotten an extra
$2 billion out of Parliament to fight acid rain and reduce
emissions by 50 percent. So what will you say when he asks
what Uncle Sam is going to do?
A:
We share Canada's interest in protecting the environment
against injury from any source, including "acid rain."
We have already made some progress. One analysis published
in 1983 showed that the acidity of precipitation in the
northeastern U.S. has remained essentially unchanged since
the mid-1960's. If it's not necessarily getting better, at
least according to this study, it's not getting worse.
Although conditions in the southeastern U.S. are much less
well understood, the data that are available do not suggest
that rigid controls must be enacted immediately.
We have in place a coordinated 12-agency research program to
find answers to the persistent, tough questions about acid
rain. Nevertheless, although considerable research has
already been done, respected scientists disagree on answers
to important questions such as:
Where should corrective action be taken to produce
improvement in a specific area?
Which pollutants are actually responsible for
environmental damage?
Which corrective action will produce the greatest
improvement at acceptable economic and social costs?
-5-
We are committed to finding answers to these questions.
Those answers will enable us to take rational, effective
corrective action. Despite the urgent need to control
government spending, our Administration has tripled support
for acid rain research -- at a time when nearly every other
government program has been pared. We are determined
to find a remedy for any threat posed by acid rain; but we
are equally determined not to heap huge new burdens on
taxpayers until we have a lot more evidence that a given
program will actually solve or help to solve this problem.
8Q: Mr. President, your ranch and your visits there provide for
you a respite from the tough job in the White House. Our
readers would be interested in how you manage your ranch
and what you enjoy most about the land and wildlife. Do
you attempt or manage the land for any particular type of
wildlife, such as songbirds or deer?
A: I'm not at the ranch as much as I'd like -- and never for
more than a few days at a time. So I'm not able to run
cattle there or actively manage it at all, any more. But
Nancy and I maintain the ranch as open land and we enjoy
seeing the hawks, the blacktailed deer, the raccoons and
possums, and the other animals that live there.
I think it's important for us to keep open lands in the
United States. There's something about the wide open spaces
that gives you a real feeling of freedom, and I think the
pioneers who settled the West felt that. That's one of the
things I enjoy most about the ranch. It brings me back to a
sense of history, of remembering where we came from, how our
country grew, and what kind of people made it. The open
lands, the wild lands, are an important part of our
heritage, and I think every American should have the
opportunity to experience that.
9Q: About 50 years ago, another President convened a White House
conference to address fish and wildlife protection issues.
Out of that grew the National Wildlife Federation. Now half
a century later, how do you feel about the possibility of
calling another White House conference to address conservation
and environmental issues?
A: Well, a lot of good came out of that first North American
Wildlife Conference called by President Roosevelt in 1936.
Not only did it foster the birth of the General Wildlife
Federation, which later became the National Wildlife
Federation, but it set in motion the annual series of North
-6-
American conferences as a way for professionals in the
fields of fish and wildlife and natural resource management
to meet and discuss current issues and directions in this
field.
Regarding Presidential involvement in the progress of
natural resource management in this country, I think you
have to look back much further, when another Roosevelt,
Theodore, brought the first generation of conservationists
into his circle of advisers and established the tradition
of involvement with the natural resources community. I'd
like to help carry on that tradition. Perhaps now is the
time to begin a comprehensive look at where the Nation will
be going in the next 50 years with the conservation of its
resources. It is my hope that all of us at the Federal,
state and local levels can work with private sector
interests to develop a national consensus on natural
resource policy.
10Q: The present problems of the deficit have focused increasing
attention upon wasteful programs and government subsidies.
In light of this, should the Federal government continue to
hold sales of public timber that lose money and charge
ranchers less than the market rate for grazing livestock on
public lands?
A: First, let me address your question about grazing fees.
This is a topic that Congress will be addressing soon. As
you know, Congress established a formula for determining
fair market value for grazing livestock on public lands and
directed that the formula be used and studied on a 7-year
trial basis. We are nearing the end of that test period
and will be making recommendations to the Congress in the
near-term. I am not ready yet to say what our recommenda-
tions will be; however, I think it is important that the
public receive a reasonable return for use of the public
resources.
With regard to public timber sales, this is an important
revenue source and is the economic livelihood of many of our
small towns and communities. I don't believe that we should
be harvesting timber stands where we cannot be assured of
prompt reforestation. There are many factors that must be
considered in deciding whether or not to harvest. Cost is
one of the factors that must be weighed heavily in the
decision process, but we also need to consider jobs,
protection of the environment, and other resource values.
-7-
11Q: You have signed legislation creating more Wilderness than
any other President. There are those who argue that we
have already established enough Wilderness and that any
more designations should stop. Others hold that we need
additional Wilderness areas. What is your position?
A: America is blessed with abundant land, water and wildlife
resources that provide excellent opportunities to our
citizens for many varied outdoor activities. We are
fortunate that our predecessors in this government had the
foresight to establish great national parks, Wilderness, and
wildlife refuge systems to protect the best of these
national treasures.
Protection of the Nation's park, Wilderness and wildlife
resources has been and continues to be a high priority of
this Administration. It is a goal I stressed to Secretary
Hodel when I nominated him to Secretary of the Interior.
With regard to the question of whether we have enough
Wilderness already, the Congress established a procedure for
inventorying and studying our resources to determine their
suitability for designation as Wilderness. We continue to
study lands to determine which areas possess Wilderness
characteristics and should be protected and preserved. The
system provides for input from all interested parties, with
the final designation decision resting with the Congress,
following recommendations from the Executive Branch.
While there is no absolute answer to your question on how
much Wilderness is needed, I think the process established
by Congress provides for proper consideration in reaching
these decisions.
12Q: The National Wildlife Federation believes the private sector
must take the lead in solving many environmental problems.
With this in mind, we have established the Corporate
Conservation Council as a forum in which these issues can be
discussed. Would you offer your views on the role you see
for the private sector and the value of this kind of exchange?
A: Well, I'm tempted to say, "Welcome to the team!" The
National Wildlife Federation isn't alone, by any means, in
believing that we need to tap the vast talent and know-how
the private sector can offer in dealing with the Nation's
natural resource issues. I'm for using the broadest array
of expertise we can put together to address these matters.
We've always believed that this was the way to go, and that
government can't do the job alone. That's the motivation
-8-
behind our Administration's private sector initiative effort
-- opening up the avenues by which business and industry can
tackle some of these more urgent priorities that are growing
beyond the means of any one organization or government
agency to solve.
If your Corporate Conservation Council can add a measure of
support for these ventures and provide the forum for
discussion of how best to build these sorts of partnerships,
so much the better. I can assure you that any
recommendations coming out of the council or any similar
body will get a receptive hearing in this White House.
We've pioneered a number of private sector projects at the
Interior Department. For example, I believe the new
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation will help promote even
greater private sector involvement in fish and wildlife
issues. The Foundation, as you know, is specifically
designed to encourage donations of funds and property to
support the activities of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. So we've got the ball rolling, and I expect the
Federation's Corporate Conservation Council to help us keep
it going with your ideas, your direction, and your support.
13Q: Many studies have concluded that pollution controls actually
provide economic benefits through increased employment and
business profits. Isn't this a strong argument for pollution
cleanup?
A: Let's just say that I don't need that argument to convince
me of the need for pollution prevention and pollution
cleanup. The strongest economic argument for pollution
prevention and cleanup is the fact that excessive pollution
levies some very heavy costs -- costs in terms of added
health care, avoidable injury, or even death of workers,
costs in accelerated deterioration of structures and
equipment, and costs where tourism and recreation
attractions are impaired.
Pollution abatement and cleanup do provide opportunities for
some new businesses, and more employment, but on the other
side of the coin we have to recognize these also add to the
final cost of goods and services, usually without increasing
the amount of goods and services. Consumers either pay the
higher costs for the U.S. made goods, or perhaps they switch
to cheaper imports, adding to our international balance of
trade deficit. This same process also can price U.S. goods
out of international markets, with the same consequences.
-9-
14Q: Mr. President, your ranch and being out-of-doors obviously
give you a great sense of well being for renewal. For the
vast majority of Americans, their ranch is found in parks,
wilderness areas, refuges -- public lands. When you head
for your ranch, Mr. and Mrs. Joe Citizen pack up the kids
and visit parks, go fishing, camping, hiking, and backpack-
ing. Would you support investments in parks, natural areas,
etc., to protect this outdoor heritage? Many of our readers
might wonder if deferral does not mean loss of these lands.
A: Yes, I support investments in parks, natural areas and other
portions of our outdoor heritage.
From 1981 through 1984, the National Park Service spent over
$365 million to acquire nearly 64,000 acres of new parkland.
Also, more than 10,000 acres were acquired by donation or
transfer. Another $66.8 million is available for acquisition
in the National Park System in 1985. As you know, we have
recommended a three-year moratorium, beginning in 1986, on
purchase of new Federal parklands in light of our national
need to do something about the budget deficit. But, our
commitment to protecting our outdoor heritage has not
diminished. In fact, even our 1986 budget request includes
$11.3 million for emergency land acquisitions so that truly
threatened areas will not be lost. We will continue to seek
creative alternatives to Federal purchase, such as land
exchanges, donations, and easements, until our Federal
budget situation allows us to once again buy additional
lands.
In addition, as many of your members know, we have just
completed a four-year Park Restoration and Improvement
Program which provided more than $1 billion for restoration
and improvement of facilities in the National Park System.
And, we continue to work with individuals and corporate
interests to stimulate and encourage private initiatives
which benefit the Nation's outdoor heritage.
15Q: Finally, Mr. President, what would you like to leave as the
environmental legacy of your terms in office?
A: Early in this century, President Theodore Roosevelt said
that we should treat the natural resources as assets which
we must turn over to the next generation increased and not
impaired in value. That's the legacy I want to leave --
fewer toxic waste hazards, cleaner air and water, identifi-
cation of causes and a framework for reduction of acid rain,
better maintained and managed national parks, improved
protection for wetlands, effective fishery restoration,
-10-
more recovery programs for endangered species, additional
wilderness, and a new spirit of partnership in the
stewardship of the land and its resources. This legacy
would include the promise of a future free of international
conflict that would bring the ultimate in environmental
disaster. And the legacy would include an America that has
the economic vitality to maintain and sustain the
environmental ethic so well stated eight decades ago by
Teddy Roosevelt.
United States of America
Office of
Office of the General Counsel
Personnel Management
Washington, D.C. 20415
In Reply Refer To:
Your Reference:
March 27, 1985
MEMORANDUM FOR THE GENERAL COUNSELS
OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
FROM:
JOSEPH A. MORRIS
GENERAL COUNSEL
Joseph A Opin
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
SUBJECT: PRO BONO PUBLICO SERVICES
BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS
Transmitted herewith is a copy of a new installment of the Federal
Personnel Manual relating to the provision of legal services pro bono publico
by attorneys employed by the United States Government.
Included in the FPM issuance is the text of the statement that has been
adopted by the Federal Legal Council in opposition to proposals to amend 18
U.S.C. § 205 so as to permit Government attorneys to represent parties other
than the United States in matters in which the United States is a party or has
a direct and substantial interest.
In this issuance, the Government acknowledges that Federal attorneys
may have an ethical obligation to the system of justice to provide pro bono
services, and that such an obligation can normally be met in a variety of
ways. (Indeed, it can be argued that service as counsel to the Federal
Government is pro bono publico by definition). Care must be taken, however,
to ensure that pro bono activities do not run afoul of 18 U.S.C. § 205 or any
other rules, including internal agency guidelines and ethical standards, that
may apply. Federal attorneys may not serve clients other than the
Government on Government time or at Government expense, and should not
accept pro bono assignments that may interfere with the timely discharge of
official duties. Above all, it should be borne in mind that the United States
Government as a client is entitled to the same degree of loyalty as is any
other client.
You may wish to share these materials with the lawyers on your staffs.
CON 132-03-9 (2/82)
990-1
Chapter 990
General and Miscellaneous
Contents
SUBCHAPTER 1. Personnel Litigation
1-1. General
1-2. Agency Responsibilities
SUBCHAPTER 2. Pro Bono Publico Services by Federal Government Attorneys
2-1. General
2-2. Restrictions on Pro Bono Activities
Appendix A. Statement by the Federal Legal Council in Opposition to Amendment
of 18 U.S.C. $ 205
Inst. 320
Federal Personnel Manual
March 14, 1985
990-5
Subchapter 2. Pro Bono Publico Services by Federal Government Attorneys
2-1. General
fall within the purview of this restriction. Attorneys are
a. Attorneys in the Federal Government often
encouraged (if not required by internal agency rules or
provide legal services pro bono publico when such
policies) to seek advice from their superiors and Desig-
activities do not present a conflict of interest with their
nated Agency Ethics Officials in interpreting and ap-
Federal responsibilities. In addition to requirements
plying this statute with respect to any proposed pro
and restrictions imposed upon pro bono services that
bono services that they plan to undertake.
are contained in relevant provisions of the Canons of
C. Federal attorneys may not perform pro bono serv-
Ethics (or relevant codes of professional respon-
ices on Government time or at Government expense.
sibility), Federal attorneys must adhere to internal
See 61 Comp. Gen. 652 (1982). Similarly, attorneys
agency rules and Federal statutes governing conflicts of
may not utilize the services of other Federal employees
interest.
on Government time to carry out otherwise imper-
b. Various bar and other groups have advocated
missible pro bono services. In addition. OPM has
positions regarding pro bono work by Federal attor-
concluded that Federal attorneys engaged in pro bono
neys that may not be consistent with Federal law or
activities may not solicit Federal clerical employees to
policies. This subchapter clarifies the restrictions con-
assist with pro bono work even on off-duty hours on a
cerning pro bono activities by Federal attorneys.
voluntary, basis. See also Letter B-215476, to David
B. Isbell, President, District of Columbia Bar. from
2-2 Restrictions on Pro Bono Activities
Harry R. Van Cleve, Acting General Counsel, General
a. The Federal Government recognizes that Federal
Accounting Office (July 2. 1984).
attorneys may have an ethical obligation to the system
d. Federal attorneys who consider performing pro
of justice to provide pro bono services, and that such an
bono services outside of their Government employ-
obligation can normally be met in a variety of ways.
ment should consult their own agencies' internal
Indeed, it can be argued that service as counsel to the
guidelines. They should bear in mind that the United
Federal Government is pro bono publico by definition.
States Government as a client is entitled to the same
b. 18 U.S.C. § 205 prohibits Federal attorneys from
degree of loyalty as any other client. In addition,
acting as agent or attorney, with or without compensa-
Federal attorneys should not accept pro bono assign-
tion, in any matter in which the Government has a
ments that may interfere with the timely discharge of
direct and substantial interest (except certain personnel
their official duties.
administrative proceedings). Attorneys should take
e. Appendix A contains the statement adopted by the
care in selecting pro bono cases that such cases do not
Federal Legal Council.
Inst. 320
Federal Personnel Manual
March 14. 1985
990-A-1
Appendix A.
Statement by The Federal Legal Council in Opposition to
Amendment of 18 U.S.C. § 205
The Federal Legal Council, established by Ex-
conflicts may arise even where the attorney's pro bono
ecutive Order 12146 and composed of the Attorney
representation involves litigation in an entirely dif-
General and General Counsels of the federal govern-
ferent substantive area and against an entirely different
ment. supports the facilitation of appropriate personal
governmental entity. For instance, an attorney in his
donations of pro bono legal services by federal
pro bono capacity might have to challenge governmen-
attorneys.
tal jurisdictional defenses or make procedural attacks
There are, however, impediments that arise from the
that would be (foreseeably or unforeseeably) applica-
dual roles of an attorney who is also a federal em-
ble to his own agency or to governmental agencies
ployee. This is recognized by 18 U.S.C. § 205. Sec-
generally. Moreover, by ignoring the extent to which
tion 205 prohibits an employee from acting as agent or
information is and should be shared among various
attorney for anyone before any department, agency, or
agencies and departments of the federal government,
court in any matter in which the United States is a party
the proposed amendment of section 205 presents a real
or has a direct and substantial interest.
threat to confidentiality of the lawyer's primary "cli-
The Council does not believe that government attor-
ent"-the federal government. It does not seem useful
neys should be permitted to litigate against their own
to forego the existing clear-cut rule to create an amor-
employer by representing pro bono clients in litigation
phous situation demanding constant (and somewhat
against the federal government. Accordingly, the
speculative) case-by-case analysis of whether a given
Federal Legal Council believes that the prohibition in
government attorney's pro bono representation would
18 U.S.C § 205 is needed and fully justified, and
raise such conflicts.
should not be amended.¹
Therefore, the proposal to amend 18 U.S.C. § 205
Section 205 serves a legitimate purpose. The gov-
raises questions regarding ethical obligations to avoid
emment has a clear interest in restricting activities by
representation of a client which would adversely affect
its employees that may be contrary to its interests.
another client, and to exercise independent profession-
Permitting federal attorneys to litigate against the Unit-
al judgment on behalf of a client; to maintain a client's
ed States would raise inevitable ethical problems. The
confidentiality; and to avoid the appearance of im-
public expects complete compliance with ethical re-
propriety. See, e.g., Canons 4, 5. and 9 of the Code of
quirements and would not be well served by permitting
Professional Responsibility and Rules 1.6 and 1.7 of
its government's attorneys to be placed in a position
the ABA's new Model Rules of Professional Conduct.
where the conflicts of interest are so apparent and the
The proposal is objectionable from a perspective of
opportunities for compromising their client's interests
effective management of the federal government, as
so plentiful.
well as from an ethical perspective. The resolution
The current ABA proposal to amend 18 U.S.C.
ignores the extent to which agency policies and strat-
§ 205 appears to be based upon the argument that the
egies-particularly in litigation-overlap and need to
size of the federal government is so great that em-
be coordinated. It is, to say the least, a questionable
ployees of one governmental entity can represent pro
management practice, with dubious effects on morale,
bono clients in suits against other governmental en-
to have one employee litigating against another. And,
tities without a conflict of interest arising. However,
as mentioned above, the proposed amendment of sec-
tion 205 will chill the effective exchange of informa-
tion within the federal government.
I It should be noted that the Council would not oppose considering an
In short, we believe there is an inherent conflict in a
amendment eliminating the District of Columbia from the proscriptions of 18
USC & 205
government lawyer privately representing others
Inst. 320
Federal Personnel Manual
March 14, 1985
990-A-2
CHAPTER 990. GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS
against the government or where the government has
of opportunities to do pro bono work in areas not
an interest in the case, and that this conflict cannot be
involving litigation against the United States. Sim-
overcome by the federal government's size. The fact
ilarly, the private bar is fully capable of providing pro
that the federal government is large does not mean that
bono representation in the one area in which govern-
it is not interconnected. The entire executive branch is,
ment lawyers are barred from providing such serv-
after all. responsible to one President.
ices-against their own client, the federal government.
Notwithstanding the current provisions of 18
Therefore. we oppose the proposed amendment of 18
U.S.C. § 205, government attorneys have a wide range
U.S.C. § 205.
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1985-460-572:2173
Inst. 320
March 14. 1985
Federal Personnel Manual