97

Trespassing requires that you be on someone else's property without their permission. The supervisor has explicitly given you permission, so it's not possible for you to trespass. You are correct that someone with the proper authority could revoke this permission at any time, at which point you would have to leave or be guilty of trespassing. The only way ...


24

No A state may not do that. The US Constitution Art. I section 8 says: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. ... To ...


21

US Laws are Free of Copyright Federal Works 17 USC 105 says: Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise. The phrase "work of the United States Government"...


15

If they tell you to leave and you do not it is trespassing, but all you have to do is say OK and leave if they ask you to go. Anyone complaining about that is immature.


15

if a postal police officer happened to be there one day, he'd [...] question the supervisor I'd say the post office people, and esp. the supervisor, are at much higher risk than you. If, by some policy or law or whatever, what you do was actually prohibited, then the supervisor and staff would likely get into trouble for allowing you there because it ...


8

Legally, no, Congress can't pass laws just because it feels like it. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution contains a set of powers Congress has.* Other sections give Congress additional powers. Elsewhere in Article I, Congressional consent is required for states to make interstate agreements, keep military forces in peacetime, and impose tariffs. It's ...


8

So a little background will help. the United States Code has only been around since 1926 where before the law was a patchwork of acts. Over time congress has taken a bundle of acts and relegated them to be covered by a title in the code. This project is still on going with legislation for Title 52 and Title 54 passing in 2014. Title 53 is a work in progress ...


8

I agree with David Siegel's answer but I think its always important in the law to consider what it would take to get what you want. I will say it is possible but not as an export prohibition per se and practically may fail. The state could use its 5th amendment powers of eminent domain to take possession of all of the desired raw materials and relevant ...


7

They can, and do; there's just one wrinkle: They get the assent of the Federal government. Take the Great Lakes Compact (please, says Nestle and Coke). It's a deal amongst the Great Lakes border states, and provinces, that decide how (or to be more precise, how not) water will leave the Great Lakes watershed. It's an agreement, not a treaty. But as ...


7

Your interpretation is correct. The constitution says that judges stay in office "until and unless they are impeached." That means that congress cannot impose a time limit on any judge's term of office. If it did so, it would be contrary to the constitution. The only grounds for removal are those to do with misbehavior. Therefore, judges have life ...


6

Yes. In 1872 President Grant was stopped for speeding (on horseback, mind you). The officer, observing that he had stopped the President of the United States, initially let him go with nothing but a verbal warning. Later the same day, the same officer stopped Grant again speeding in the same place. The officer then informed Grant that he would have to be ...


6

When an individual or an organization (such as a business or a local or state government) thinks that a governmental action is in violation of a constitutional limitation, s/he/it may file suit against the government (Federal, state, or local as the case may be). Such suits most often seek injunctions against continuation of the action, but sometimes damages,...


6

There are some statutes that have a section that says "any violation of this action is punishable by . . . ." but the INA is not one of them. Generally speaking, the way it would be imposed would be: (1) to deny entry on a departing commercial airplane flight or ship (which is enforced by the private enterprises involved pursuant to Transportation ...


6

Mueller was appointed under Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 600, which provides at § 600.8(c), Closing documentation, that At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel. The use of ...


5

2 USC 192 imposes a penalty of $100-$1000 and 1-12 months in prison. That assumes a trial and conviction. Officials were found in contempt under the previous administration, but there was no criminal prosecution (DOJ would have to prosecute, which they declined to do).


5

The main impediment is identifying exactly what "a law" is. When people talk (casually) about "the law", that can refer to statutes enacted by Congress, regulations set forth by administrative agencies to articulate specifics of those statutes, and Supreme Court rulings as to what "the law" is or says. The canonical example of "a law" is a statute passed by ...


5

No (with one exception, see bottom), there is not currently any limits to the power of a Presidential Pardon. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution grants the power: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he ...


5

Employees are only required to work in the sense that refusal to report can result in discipline (like reprimand or firing) and forfeit of whatever money you would have earned had you shown up. This is exactly the same way federal employees (or most employees, for that matter) are always required to work. The fact that they're not being paid on time has ...


4

Specifically, if a committee votes to cite someone for contempt of the committee, a resolution would pass to the full chamber. The full chamber, House or Senate, then may or may not pass it. If the full chamber passes the resolution, there is more than one option with which to enforce it. Although it has not been used since the early part of the last ...


4

The United States has a very liberal attitude when it comes to free speech. Short of materials that are: child pornography, restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), Libelous/Fraudulent, encourage or aid others in breaking the law, or seditious/treasonous/ terroistic/other credible threats there is almost nothing that can't be ...


4

No, it is not illegal to use the symbol of the federal government for your own personal use as it is a public domain symbol. However, the USMC will frown upon it. Marines have a sort of warrior culture ethos to them, when compared to the other branches of the U.S. military and a strong culture among those who served. Among Marine culture "there is no such ...


4

See http://uscode.house.gov/download/download.shtml to start. But what exactly do you mean by a "law"? Lots falls under that term: do you include case law? SCOTUS decisions? Administrative policies? Read earlier Law SE question Naive approach to aggregating all US Federal Laws?


4

The US Constitution Article II, Section 2 grants sayt that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment". It does not anywhere say that a pardon can be rescinded. Until a constitutional amendment is added giving the president the power to rescind a pardon (zero chance of ...


4

If someone was charged with 15 counts of a crime but was only indicted on 2 counts, can the prosecutor introduce evidence at sentencing of charges that the person was not indicted on? In federal court, yes. This has been the case since Williams v. New York, 337 U.S. 241 (1949) which held that evidence such as counts and conduct upon which the defendant ...


3

No. The U.S. Attorney brings charges on behalf of the United States, which is the filing party, at least in criminal cases. That's why every criminal case is styled "United States v. [Whomever]."


3

What are the things that I should prepare for this session, in terms of order of dress, language, content? Dress In an actual court room, suit and tie is preferred for men and formal dress for women for lawyers and professionals. Your "Sunday best" or what you would wear to work on a typical day would be appropriate if you don't have a suit and tie or ...


3

Defamation is a suit that can be brought by anyone, however, there are extra hurdles if the plaintiff is an official. Following New York Times Co v Sullivan, the plaintiff must prove actual malice: that the defendant knew the information was untrue or acted with reckless disregard for its truth.


3

First, return addresses are intended simply to provide a mechanism by which an undeliverable or returned letter can be returned to the sender. If you have a practical concern then consider the following: I worked for the postal service and never experienced an instance where anyone cared whether there was an accurate return address except in the following ...


3

What is the estimated number of lines in all current US federal laws? I realize that this metrics isn't accurate. Which font size do we use? Do we include comments? How to count someone v. United States? U.S. federal law consists of: 52 Titles of the United States Code (some of which have more than one volume) and a smattering of uncodified statutes ...


3

HIPAA only governs the disclosure of electronic medical records. It has nothing to do with Social Security numbers, except to the extent that they appear in your electronic medical records. Generally speaking, there is no law against asking someone for their Social Security number. It is a request for information, protected by the First Amendment. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible