Epstein Secrets

has the constitutional authority to refuse to enforce unconstitutional laws." Id. at 53. The opinion concluded that “if the President chooses to sign H.R. 3792, he would be constitutionally authorized to decline to enforce" the constitutionally objectionable section. Id. at 38. 4) Issues Raised by Sec

re the Supreme Court." Id. at 578. Congressional Materials 1) The President's Suspension of the Competition in Contracting Act is Unconstitutional, H.R. Rep. No. 138, 99th Cong., Ist Sess. (1985): The House Committee on Government Operations concluded thatthe President lacked the authority to refuse

e is currently any lack of coordination, and a new position could lead to duplication of efforts. Furthermore, subsection (a}(2)(A} incorrectly lists the Civil Division and not the Civil Rights Division. 255 Section 236 In subsection (a), DOJ questions the reliability of the congressional findings, especially with

ic to know and the need of the [g]overnment to keep information in confidence." John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146, 152 (1989)(quoting H.R. Rep. No. 89-147 at 6 (1966), reprinted in 1966 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2418, 5 EFTA00069316 2423)). The nine FOR exemptions reflect Congress's determination

lege, as indicated on the FBI index. This group of emails consists of communications between FBI employees and Assistant United States Attorneys in the Civil Division of the USAO-SDNY, which provided details the AUSA could use in the indictment of Jeffrey Epstein. Seidel Decl. . As confidential communications be

ic to know and the need of the [g]overnment to keep information in confidence." John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp.,493 U.S. 146, 152 (1989) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 89-147 at 6 (1966), reprinted in 1966 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2418, 2423)). The nine FOIA exemptions reflect Congress's determination that "public di

lege, as indicated on the BOP index. This group of emails consists of communications between BOP employees and Assistant United States Attorneys in the Civil Division of the USAO-SDNY, which represented BOP in connection with litigation requests for documents related to Epstein, and how to respond to these reques

ic to know and the need of the [g]overnment to keep information in confidence." John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp.,493 U.S. 146, 152 (1989) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 89-147 at 6 (1966), reprinted in 1966 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2418, 2423)). The nine FOIA exemptions reflect Congress's determination that "public di

lege, as indicated on the BOP index. This group of emails consists of communications between BOP employees and Assistant United States Attorneys in the Civil Division of the USAO-SDNY, which represented BOP in connection with litigation requests for documents related to Epstein, and how to respond to these reques

ic to know and the need of the [g]overnment to keep information in confidence." John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp.,493 U.S. 146, 152 (1989) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 89-147 at 6 (1966), reprinted in 1966 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2418, 2423)). The nine FOIA exemptions reflect Congress's determination that "public di

lege, as indicated on the BOP index. This group of emails consists of communications between BOP employees and Assistant United States Attorneys in the Civil Division of the USAO-SDNY, which represented BOP in connection with litigation requests for documents related to Epstein, and how to respond to these reques