Posted by Orin Kerr:
Holder, OLC, and the Bill to Give DC Voting Rights Bill:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_03_29-2009_04_04.shtml#1238603087


   [1]The Washington Post reports:

       Justice Department lawyers concluded in an unpublished opinion
     earlier this year that the historic D.C. voting rights bill pending
     in Congress is unconstitutional, according to sources briefed on
     the issue. But Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who supports
     the measure, ordered up a second opinion from other lawyers in his
     department and determined that the legislation would pass muster.
       A finding that the voting rights bill runs afoul of the
     Constitution could complicate an upcoming House vote and make the
     measure more vulnerable to a legal challenge that probably would
     reach the Supreme Court if it is enacted. The bill, which would
     give the District a vote in the House for the first time, appeared
     to be on the verge of passing last month before stalling when
     pro-gun legislators tried to attach an amendment weakening city gun
     laws. Supporters say it could reach the House floor in May.
       In deciding that the measure is unconstitutional, lawyers in the
     department's Office of Legal Counsel matched a conclusion reached
     by their Bush administration counterparts nearly two years ago,
     when a lawyer there testified that a similar bill would not
     withstand legal attack.
       Holder rejected the advice and sought the opinion of the
     solicitor general's office, where lawyers told him that they could
     defend the legislation if it were challenged after its enactment.

     I don't quite know what to make of this story, not being so familiar
   with how OLC reviews proposed legislation. First, are OLC opinions
   about the constitutionality of proposed legislation normally binding
   on the executive? OLC opinions on interpreting enacted legislation are
   binding on the executive branch, but I don't know if opinions on the
   constitutionality of proposed legislation are generally treated the
   same way. And what is the AG's usual role in reviewing OLC opinions
   about proposed legislation? I'm not really sure.
     Hat tip:[2] Ed Whelan, who has more on this.

References

   1. 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/31/AR2009033104426_pf.html
   2. 
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDE3NWJhNTkxYzJmMmJkOTQ5ZWU3Y2U1ZTFlZDMxOTc=

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to