3 U.S.C. § 302
Scope of delegation of functions
The authority conferred by this chapter shall apply to any function vested in the President by law if such law does not affirmatively prohibit delegation of the performance of such function as herein provided for, or specifically designate the officer or officers to whom it may be delegated. This chapter shall not be deemed to limit or derogate from any existing or inherent right of the President to delegate the performance of functions vested in him by law, and nothing herein shall be deemed to require express authorization in any case in which such an official would be presumed in law to have acted by authority or direction of the President.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases, 1961–2005 · leading case: United States v. Allen, 31 M.J. 572 (1990).
United States v. Allen, 31 M.J. 572 (1990). “705(d)(4), because appellant has failed to show that the Secretarial limitation placed on the convening authority in any way influenced the decision of the convening authority not to accept the pretrial agreement offered by appellant.”
Rear Admiral (Lh) Noel K. Dysart, Med. Corps, U.S. Navy (Ret.) v. United States, 369 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2004). “3 U.S.C. § 302 . We have previously held that, in view of section 302, the President need not expressly delegate authority.”
James G. Law v. United States, 11 F.3d 1061 (Fed. Cir. 1993). “3 U.S.C. § 302 (1988) states: The authority conferred by this chapter shall apply to any function vested in the President by law if such law does not affirmatively prohibit delegation of the performance of such function as herein provided for, or specifically designate the…”
John H. Dunmar v. Stephen Ailes, Sec'y of the Army, 348 F.2d 51 (D.C. Cir. 1965). “Nor need the President in terms delegate this function to the Secretary of the Army; indeed 3 U.S.C. § 302 provides that “nothing herein shall be deemed to require express authorization in any case in which such an official would be presumed in law to have acted by authority or…”
Population Inst. v. McPherson, 797 F.2d 1062 (D.C. Cir. 1986). “In view of 3 U.S.C. § 302 , which provides that the President may delegate any function vested in the President by law “if such law does not affirmatively prohibit delegation,” the precatory language in the committee report was not sufficient to invalidate the delegation to the…”
Lewis v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 158 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “1993) (holding that 3 U.S.C. § 302 does not require the President expressly to delegate the authority to deny or affirm the promotion of an Officer).”
Martin v. Warner, 419 F. Supp. 133 (E.D.N.Y 1976). “3 U.S.C. § 302 . However, under 3 U.S.C. § 301 , by Executive Orders Nos.”
Presidential Succession & Delegation in Case of Disability (OLC 1981). “Congress has further provided, in 3 U.S.C. § 302 , that: The authority conferred by this chapter shall apply to any function vested in the President by law if such law 95 does not affirmatively prohibit delegation of the perform ance of such function as herein provided for, or…”
Assignment of Certain Functions Related to Military Appointments (OLC 2005). “” 3 U.S.C. § 302 (2000). First, you have asked whether 10 U.”
Auth. of the Deputy Attorney Gen. Under Exec. Order 12333 (OLC 2001). “Section 301, according to 3 U.S.C. § 302 (2000), does not “limit or derogate from any existing or inherent right of the President to delegate the performance of functions vested in him by law,” and Executive Order 12333, which touches on many aspects of the President’s…”
Waiver of the Application of Conflict of Interest Laws for Members of the President's Comm'n on Strategic Forces (OLC 1983). “In addition, the President has certain inherent authority, which is recognized but not specifically enumerated in 3 U.S.C. § 302 , to delegate authority to officials who do not meet the requirements set forth in § 301.”
Procedures for Investigating Allegations Concerning Senior Admin. Officials (OLC 1982). “t be interpreted to authorize the Council lo develop procedures lo investigate misconduct by Inspectors General, we cannot construe it also to bestow authonty on the Council actually to conduct such investigations Such a delegation of substantive presidential authority to an…”
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.