3 U.S.C. § 112

Detail of employees of executive departments

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 3 CasesGoogle Scholar

The head of any department, agency, or independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government may detail, from time to time, employees of such department, agency, or establishment to the White House Office, the Executive Residence at the White House, the Office of the Vice President, the Domestic Policy Staff, and the Office of Administration. Any such office to which an employee has been detailed for service to such office shall reimburse the detailing department, agency, or establishment for the pay of each employee thereof—(1) who is so detailed, and(2) who is performing services which have been or would otherwise be performed by an employee of such office,for any period occurring during any fiscal year after 180 calendar days after the employee is detailed in such year.(Added Pub. L. 95–570, § 3(a), Nov. 2, 1978, 92 Stat. 2449.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section applicable to any fiscal year beginning on or after Oct. 1, 1978, see section 6(a) of Pub. L. 95–570, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 102 of this title.

Authority With Respect to Detailed Employees

Pub. L. 107–67, title VI, § 637, Nov. 12, 2001, 115 Stat. 553, provided that: “During fiscal year 2002 and thereafter, the head of an entity named in 3 U.S.C. 112 may, with respect to civilian personnel of any branch of the Federal Government performing duties in such entity, exercise authority comparable to the authority that may by law (including chapter 57 and sections 8344 and 8468 of title 5, United States Code) be exercised with respect to the employees of an Executive agency (as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105) by the head of such Executive agency, and the authority granted by this section shall be in addition to any other authority available in law.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2022 · leading case: Peggy Maloney v. Exec. Off. of the President, Off. of Admin., 2022 MSPB 26 (MSPB 2022).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Peggy Maloney v. Exec. Off. of the President, Off. of Admin., 2022 MSPB 26 (MSPB 2022). · cites it 4× “The administrative judge noted that the court, in finding that the Executive Residence was not an “independent establishment,” relied on 3 U.S.C. § 112 , which the court held “distinguish[es]” the Executive Residence from independent establishments.”

Sean T. Haddon v. Gary J. Walters, Chief Usher, 43 F.3d 1488 (D.C. Cir. 1995). “” 3 U.S.C. § 112 (1988) (emphasis added). That Congress distinguished the Executive Residence from the independent establishments, whatever they may be, suggests that Congress does not regard the Executive Residence to be an independent establishment, as it uses that term.”

Application of the Anti-Nepotism Statute to a Presidential Appointment in the White House Off. (OLC 2017). · cites it 2× “First, the court observed that another statute, 3 U.S.C. § 112 , authorizes “[t]he head of any department, agency, or independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government [to] detail, from time to time, employees 5 Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel in Volume…”

Applicability of 3 U.S.C. § 112 to Detailees Supporting the President's Initiative on Race (OLC 1997). · cites it 4× “Applicability of 3 U.S.C. § 112 to Detailees Supporting the President’s Initiative on Race 3 U .”

Application of 18 U.S.C. § 207 to Former CIA Officials' Commc'ns With CIA Employees on Detail to Other Agencies (OLC 2007). “, Applicability of 3 U.S.C. § 112 to Detailees Supporting the President’s Initiative on Race, 21 Op.”

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.