DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION. See Freedom of Information
Act.
DISCOVERY. See Constitutional Law, III, 4.
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST BLACKS. See Civil Rights Act of 1964,
2-4.
DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT. See Armed Forces; Civil
Rights Act of 1964; Education Amendments of 1972.
DISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY FUNDED EDUCATION PRO-
GRAMS. See Education Amendments of 1972.
DISCRIMINATION ON BASIS OF NATIONAL ORIGIN. See Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 1.
DISCRIMINATION ON BASIS OF SEX. See Education Amendments
of 1972.
DISMISSAL OF MILITARY CHARGES AS AFFECTING SPEEDY
TRIAL ON SUBSEQUENT CIVILIAN CHARGES. See Constitu-
tional Law, VII.
DISTRICT COURTS. See Tucker Act.
See Criminal Law, 1; Jurisdiction, 2.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY. See Constitutional Law, II.
DRUGS. See Trademark Act of 1946.
DUE PROCESS. See Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1; Constitutional Law,
III; VII; Habeas Corpus, 2.
EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972.
Federally funded education programs-Sex discrimination against em-
ployees. Section 901(a) of Title IX of Amendments-which provides that
"no person" shall, on basis of sex, be denied benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under, any federally funded education program-prohibits
such programs from discriminating against not only students but also such
programs' employees, and Health, Education, and Welfare Department's
regulations prohibiting such employment discrimination are valid. North
Haven Bd. of Ed. v. Bell, p. 512.
ELECTION OF UNION OFFICERS. See Labor-Management Report-
ing and Disclosure Act of 1959.
ELECTIONS. See Constitutional Law, VI; Reapportionment.
ELECTRIC UTILITIES. See Constitutional Law, I; IX.
EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEES. See Armed Forces; Civil Rights
Act of 1964; Education Amendments of 1972; Labor-Management
Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959; Tucker Act.
EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION. See Armed Forces; Civil Rights
Act of 1964; Education Amendments of 1972.
EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS. See Constitutional Law, IV;
Jurisdiction, 2.
ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION. See Constitutional Law, V;
Standing to Sue.
EVICTIONS. See Constitutional Law, III, 2.
EXEMPTION 6 OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. See Free-
dom of Information Act, 1.
EXEMPTION 7 OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. See Free-
dom of Information Act, 2.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION FILES AS EXEMPT
FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. See Freedom of Information
Act, 2.
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES. See Tucker Act.
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. See Constitu-
tional Law, I; IX.
FEDERALLY FUNDED EDUCATION PROGRAMS. See Education
Amendments of 1972.
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. See also Civil Rights
Act of 1964, 3; Constitutional Law, III, 4; Trademark Act of 1946.
Amendments to Rules, p. 1013.
FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. See also Criminal
Law, 1.
Amendments to Rules, p. 1021.
FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS. See Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1;
Constitutional Law, I; IX; Criminal Law, 2; Habeas Corpus, 2;
Reapportionment.
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT.
Navy's discharge of ordnance into waters-Failure to obtain permit—
Injunctive relief.-In an action alleging violation of Act by Navy's dis-
charge of ordnance into waters near island used for air-to-ground weapons
training, wherein District Court found that water quality was not harmed
but ordered Navy to comply with Act by applying for permit from Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Act did not withdraw District Court's equitable
discretion so as to require it to enjoin Navy's operations pending consider-
ation of permit application. Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, p. 305.
FIFTH AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, II; VII.
FINAL JUDGMENTS. See Jurisdiction, 3.
FIRST AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, V; VI; National
Labor Relations Act, 2; Standing to Sue.
FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER ACTIONS. See Constitutional
Law, III, 2.
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. See Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1; Con-
stitutional Law, II; III, 2; IV; Habeas Corpus, 2.
FOURTH AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, VIII.
FRAUD. See Commodity Exchange Act.
FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY. See Labor-Management Reporting and
Disclosure Act of 1959.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
1. Exemption 6-Iranian nationals-Possession of passports.-In-
formation sought by respondent from petitioner State Department, con-
sisting of documents indicating whether certain Iranian nationals held valid
United States passports, satisfied "similar files" requirement of Act's Ex-
emption 6, relating to personnel and medical files and "similar files the dis-
closure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of per-
sonal privacy," and petitioner's denial of disclosure request should have
been sustained upon a showing that release of information would constitute
a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Department of State
v. Washington Post Co., p. 595.
2. Exemption 7-Summaries of information compiled for law enforce-
ment purposes.-Information contained in records originally compiled for
law enforcement purposes but later reproduced or summarized in a new
document prepared for other purposes-such as summaries culled from
Federal Bureau of Investigation files on individuals who had criticized
Presidential administration, which summaries were transmitted by FBI to
White House does not lose its exempt status under Exemption 7 of Act
but continues to meet Exemption's threshold requirement of being com-
piled for law enforcement purposes. FBI v. Abramson, p. 615.
FREEDOM OF RELIGION. See Constitutional Law, V; Standing to
Sue.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH. See Constitutional Law, VI; Labor-
Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959; National Labor
Relations Act, 2.
FREIGHT CHARGES. See Interstate Commerce Act.
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT. See Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1.
FUTURES TRADING. See Commodity Exchange Act.
GAS UTILITIES. See Constitutional Law, I; IX.
GENDER-BASED DISCRIMINATION.
GENERIC PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. See Trademark Act of 1946.
GEORGIA. See Criminal Law, 2.
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. See Armed Forces; Tucker Act.
HABEAS CORPUS.
1. Amendment to Rules Governing 28 U. S. C. §2254 Proceedings,
p. 1031.
2. Federal relief-Burden of proving self-defense-Validity of state-
court instructions.-Respondent state prisoners alleged no deprivation of
federal rights and were not entitled to federal habeas relief insofar as they
simply challenged correctness, under Ohio law, of state-court jury instruc-
tions that a defendant bore burden of proving self-defense by a preponder-
ance of evidence; and respondents are barred from asserting, in federal ha-
beas corpus proceedings, their colorable constitutional claim that Due
Process Clause required State to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable
doubt since such claim was forfeited in state courts because of respondents'
failure to comply with Ohio rule mandating contemporaneous objections to
jury instructions. Engle v. Isaac, p. 107.
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT.
Education Amendments of 1972.
HEARING OFFICERS UNDER MEDICARE PROGRAM. See Con-
stitutional Law, III, 3.
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN. See Constitutional Law, IV.
IMPARTIALITY OF MEDICARE HEARING OFFICERS. See Con-
stitutional Law, III, 3.
IMPLIED CAUSES OF ACTION. See Commodity Exchange Act.
IMPLIED EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS. See Tucker Act.
IMPORTATION OF RUSSIAN GOODS. See National Labor Rela-
tions Act, 2.
INFRINGEMENT OF TRADEMARKS. See Trademark Act of 1946.
INJUNCTIONS. See Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
INSTRUCTIONS TO JURY. See Constitutional Law, III, 1; Criminal
Law, 1; Habeas Corpus, 2.
INSURANCE CARRIERS' DECISIONS AS TO MEDICARE BENE-
FITS. See Constitutional Law, III, 3; Jurisdiction, 1.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE. See Constitutional Law, I; Interstate
Commerce Act.
Railroad freight charges-Consignor's liability.—Although petitioner, a
common carrier by rail, violated Interstate Commerce Commission's credit
regulations promulgated under § 3(2) of Act by delivering shipments to
consignee without first collecting freight charges or checking consignee's
credit standing, such violation did not bar petitioner's collection of freight
charges from respondent consignor who had not executed "nonrecourse
clause" in bills of lading and thus was primarily liable for freight charges.
Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Commercial Metals Co., p. 336.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION. See Interstate Com-
merce Act.
IRANIAN NATIONALS. See Freedom of Information Act, 1.
JUDICIAL CONDUCT RESULTING IN MISTRIAL. See Constitu-
tional Law, II.
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DECISIONS AS TO MEDICARE BENE-
FITS. See Jurisdiction, 1.
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORDERS. See National Labor Relations Act, 1.
JURISDICTION. See also Constitutional Law, III, 4; National Labor
Relations Act, 1; Tucker Act.
1. Court of Claims-Medicare program-Review of insurance carriers'
decisions.-In view of provisions of Social Security Act limiting judicial re-
view of decisions of private insurance carriers (acting for Government) con-
cerning Part B of Medicare program to review of decisions as to eligibility
to participate in Part B, Court of Claims has no jurisdiction to review such
carriers' determinations of amount of benefits payable under Part B.
United States v. Erika, Inc., p. 201.
2. Supreme Court-Conviction in District Court for District of Colum-
bia Collateral attack under 28 U. S. C. § 2255.-Supreme Court has ju-
risdiction to review Court of Appeals' judgment reversing judgment of
Federal District Court for District of Columbia-respondent having filed
motion in District Court under 28 U. S. C. § 2255 collaterally attacking his
sentence in prosecution in 1963 when District Court had exclusive jurisdic-
tion over local felonies committed in District-and Supreme Court is not
required to refrain from reviewing decision on alleged ground that Court of
Appeals' decision was based on an adequate and independent local ground
of decision; equal protection principles do not require that a § 2255 motion
by a prisoner convicted in 1963 be treated as though it was a motion under
District of Columbia Code after 1970. United States v. Frady, p. 152.
|