22 U.S.C. § 620

RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION IN TIBET.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar

“(a)High-Level Contacts.—Pursuant to section 105 of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 6414), the United States Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China should—“(1) meet with the 11th Panchen Lama, who was taken from his home on May 17, 1995, and otherwise ascertain information concerning his whereabouts and well-being; and“(2) request that the Government of the People’s Republic of China release the 11th Panchen Lama and allow him to pursue his religious studies without interference and according to tradition.“(b)Promotion of Increased Advocacy.—Pursuant to section 108(a) of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 6417(a)), it is the sense of Congress that representatives of the United States Government in exchanges with officials of the Government of the People’s Republic of China should call for and otherwise promote the cessation of all interference by the Government of the People’s Republic of China or the Communist Party in the religious affairs of the Tibetan people, including with respect to the reincarnation system of Tibetan Buddhism.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1983–1986 · leading case: Mitchell Block, President, Direct Cinema Ltd., Inc. v. Edwin Meese, Iii, Attorney General of the United States

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mitchell Block, President, Direct Cinema Ltd., Inc. v. Edwin Meese, Iii, Attorney General of the United States (1986) cadc “Appellants have not challenged the Department’s authority under the statute to classify films, nor have they urged that the reporting requirement imposed by the Department goes beyond the rulemaking authority for implementation of the Act conferred by 22 U.S.C. § 620 . Their…”

Keene v. Smith (1983) caed “VI Section 10 of the Act, 22 U.S.C. § 620 , authorizes the Attorney General to adopt regulations to implement the Act.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.