Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Ritter v. United States, 84 Ct. Cl. 293

(1936), cert. denied, 300 U.S. 668 (1937)

United States v. Baggot, 463 U.S. 476 (1983)

United States v. Hastings, 681 F.2d 706 (11th
Cir. 1982)

United States v. Michael O. Myers, Raymond
Lederer, Frank Thompson, et al., Cr. Nos.
80-00249, 80-00253, 80-00291 (E.D.N.Y.
June 27, 1980)

United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc., 463 U.S. 418 (1983)

United States v. Harrison A. Williams,

Jr., et al. Cr. No. 80-00575 (E.D.N.Y.
Dec. 22, 1980)

U.S. Socony v. Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150 (1940)

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS, STATUTES AND RULES

U.S. Const., Art. I, sec. 2

U.S. Const., Art. I, sec. 3

U.S. Const., Art. II, sec. 4

U.S. Const. Art. III, sec. 2

28 U.S.C. sec. 372(c) (1982 & Supp. III, 1985)
(Judicial Councils Reform

and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of
1980, Pub. L. 96-458 sec. 3(a), 94 Stat. 2036,
and amended by Pub. L. 98-353 sec. 107, 99 Stat. 342)

Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)

OTHER AUTHORITIES

The Association of the Bar of the City of New York, The Law of Presidential Impeachment and Removal, 29

The Record 154 (1974)

R. Berger, The President, Congress and the Courts,

83 Yale L.J. 1111 (1974)

The Federalist No. 65 (Modern Library ed.)

Firmage & Mangrum, Removal of the President:

Resignation and the Procedural Law of Impeachment,
1974 Duke L.J. 1023

House Comm. on the Judiciary, Constitutional
Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,
93d Cong., 2d Sess. (1974)

House Comm. on the Judiciary, Impeachment, Selected Materials, 93d Cong., 1st Sess. at Section 2057 (1973)

House Comm. on the Judiciary, Procedures for Handling Impeachment Inquiry Material, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. (1974)

J. Labovitz, Presidential Impeachment 199 (1978)

8 J. Moore, Federal Practice, paragraph 6.05[2]; 6.05[4] (2d ed. 1987)

Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Dep't. of
Justice, Legal Aspects of Impeachment:
An Overview 46 (1974)

Proceedings of the United States Senate
in the Trial of Impeachment of Halsted
L. Ritter, United States District
Judge for the Southern District of
Florida, 74th Cong., 2d Sess. (1933-1936)

Proceedings of the United States Senate

in the Impeachment Trial of Harry

E. Claiborne a Judge of the U.S. District for

the District of Nevada, S. Doc. 99-48, 99th Cong., 2d. Sess. (1986)

1 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (805 (1837)

1 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (803 (1905)

[blocks in formation]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that one copy of the foregoing List of Authorities was sent to the following individuals this 2nd day of September,

1987:

By Federal Express addressed as follows:

Terence J. Anderson, Esquire

c/o The University of Miami
School of Law

1311 Miller Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33124

By regular U.S. Mail, postage prepaid addressed as follows:

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN OPPOSITION TO
JUDGE HASTINGS' EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY AND
UNSEAL MISCELLANEOUS ORDER 87-1 (DATED AUGUST 5, 1987)

I. INTRODUCTION

United States District Judge Alcee L. Hastings has moved this Court to stay its Order of August 5, 1987 granting to the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of

Representatives (the Committee) access to the records, minutes, transcripts and exhibits of Grand Jury No. 81-1-GJ (MIA) for use in connection with the Committee's impeachment inquiry concerning Judge Hastings. Judge Hastings has also moved to unseal the records pertaining to that Order.1

In his motions and supporting arguments, Judge Hastings concedes that the District Court possesses the discretion to make available to the Committee those parts of the grand jury record for which a need is demonstrated. Motion at 10-11. In opposing

the August 5 Order, however, he has raised procedural arguments which are either inapplicable or moot, and substantive challenges

1The Order of August 5, 1987 was sealed sua sponte by Chief

Judge King. The Committee does not oppose Judge Hastings' request that the Order and documents in the Court's file

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »