7 FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Rule 6

(h) Producing a Statement.

(1) In General Rule 26.2(a)-(d) and (f) applies at any hearing
under this rule, unless the magistrate judge for good cause
rules otherwise in a particular case.
(2) Sanctions for Not Producing a Statement. If a party dis-
obeys a Rule 26.2 order to deliver a statement to the moving
party, the magistrate judge must not consider the testimony
of a witness whose statement is withheld.
(As added Apr. 24, 1972, eff. Oct. 1, 1972; amended Mar. 9, 1987, eff.
Aug. 1, 1987; Apr. 22, 1993, eff. Dec. 1, 1993; Apr. 24, 1998, eff. Dec.
1,1998; Apr. 29, 2002, eff. Dec. 1, 2002.)
TITLE HI. THE GRAND JURY, THE INDICTMENT, AND THE
INFORMATION
Rule 6. The Grand Jury
(a) Summoning a Grand Jury.
(1) In General. When the public interest so requires, the
court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned.
A grand jury must have 16 to 23 members, and the court must
order that enough legally qualified persons be summoned to
meet this requirement.
(2) Alternate Jurors. When a grand jury is selected, the court
may also select alternate jurors. Alternate jurors must have
the same qualifications and be selected in the same manner as
any other juror. Alternate jurors replace jurors in the same se-
quence in which the alternates were selected. An alternate
juror who replaces a juror is subject to the same challenges,
takes the same oath, and has the same authority as the other
jurors.
(b) Objection to the Grand Jury or to a Grand Juror.
(1) Challenges. Either the government or a defendant may
challenge the grand jury on the ground that it was not law-
fully drawn, summoned, or selected, and may challenge an in-
dividual juror on the ground that the juror is not legally
qualified.
(2) Motion to Dismiss an Indictment. A party may move to
dismiss the indictment based on an objection to the grand jury
or on an individual juror's lack of legal qualification, unless
the court has previously ruled on the same objection under
Rule 6(b)(l). The motion to dismiss is governed by 28 U.S.C.
§1867(e). The court must not dismiss the indictment on the
ground that a grand juror was not legally qualified if the
record shows that at least 12 qualified jurors concurred in the
indictment.
(c) Foreperson and Deputy Foreperson. The court will appoint
one juror as the foreperson and another as the deputy foreperson.
In the foreperson's absence, the deputy foreperson will act as the
foreperson. The foreperson may administer oaths and affirmations
and will sign all indictments. The foreperson—or another juror
designated by the foreperson—will record the number of jurors
concurring in every indictment and will file the record with the
clerk, but the record may not be made public unless the court so
orders.
FindLaw Constitutional Law Center Page 1 of 37

« AT I O

Politics
Site Index I Site Search

Related Articles POWERED BY

• Political Guide: Supreme Court FindLaw
Email a Link to This Case
http://laws.findlaw.com/dc/025254a.html

U.S. DC Circuit Court of Appeals

CTR NATL SEC STUDIES v DOJ
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Argued November 18, 2002 Decided June 17, 2003

No. 02-5254
& No. 02-5300

Center for National Security Studies, et al.,

Appellants/Cross-Appellees

v.

U.S. Department of Justice,

Appellees/Cross-Appellants

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia
(No. Olcv02500)

Gregory G. Katsas, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for
appellants/cross-appellees. With him on the briefs were Roscoe C. Howard, Jr.,
U.S. Attorney, Mark B. Stern, Robert M. Loeb, and Eric D. Miller, Attorneys,
U.S. Department of Justice.

Daniel J. Popeo and Paul D. Kamenar were on the brief for amid curiae
Washington Legal Foundation and the Jew- ish Institute for National Security
Affairs in support of appellant urging partial reversal.

Kate A. Martin argued the cause for appellees/cross- appellants. With her on
the briefs were David L. Sobel, Elliot M. Mincberg, Arthur B. Spitzer, Steven R.
Shapiro, and Lucas Guttentag.

http://laws.lp.fmdlaw.com/dc/025254a.html&friend=nytimes 6/17/03
84 STAT. 3 PUBLIC LAW 91-648-JAN. 5, 1971 1909

Public Law 91-648

AN ACT January S, 1971
To reinforce the federal system by strengthening the personnel resources of [s.J_i]
State and local governments, to Improve intergovernmental cooperation in
the administration of grant-in-aid programs, to provide grants for improvement
of State and local personnel administration, to authorize Federal assistance
in training State and local employees, to provide grants to State and local
governments for training of their employees, to authorize interstate compacts
for personnel and training activities, to facilitate the temporary assignment of
personnel between the Federal Government, and State and local governments,
and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled. That this Act may PJ"**^""™*"tal
be cited as the "Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970". 1970.
DECLARATION OF rOUCY

SEC. 2. The Congress hereby finds and declares—

That effective State and local governmental institutions are essential
in the maintenance and development of the Federal system in an
increasingly complex and interdependent society.
That, since numerous governmental activities administered by the
State and local governments are related to national purpose and are
financed in part oy Federal funds, a national interest exists in a high
caliber of public service in State and local governments.
That the quality of public service at all levels of government can adm*ni.Trauoi.
be improved by the development of systems of personnel administra- systems.
tion consistent with such merit principles as—
(1) recruiting, selecting, and advancing employees on the basis
of their relative ability, knowledge, and skills, including open
consideration of qualified applicants for initial appointment;
(2) providing equitable and adequate compensation;
(3) training employees, as needed, to assure high-quality
performance;
(4) retaining employees on the basis of the adequacy of their
performance, correcting inadequate performance, and separating
employees whose inadequate performance cannot be corrected:
(5) assuring fair treatment of applicants and employees in all
aspects of personnel administration without regard to political
affiliation, race, color, national origin, sex, or religious creed and
with proper regard for their privacy and constitutional rights
as citizens; and
(6) assuring that employees are protected against coercion for
partisan political purposes and are prohibited from using their
official authority for the purpose of interfering with or affecting
the result of an election or a nomination for office.
That Federal financial and technical assistance to State and local
governments for strengthening their personnel administration in a
manner consistent with these principles is in the national interest.
SEC. 3. The authorities provided by this Act shall be administered in
such manner as (1) to recognize fully the rights, powers, and responsi-
bilities of State and local governments, and (2) to encourage innova-
tion and allow for diversity on the part of State and local governments
in the design, execution, and management of their own systems of
personnel administration.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

RAYMOND ANTHONY SMITH, as :

Administrator of the Estate of George :
Eric Smith, deceased; and :
KATHERINE SOULAS, in her own right,
on behalf of her minor children, and as :
Executrix of the Estate of Timothy Soulas,
deceased :

Plaintiffs, 01 Civ. 10132 (HB)

-v-

THE ISLAMIC EMIRATE OF : OPINION

AFGHANISTAN, THE TALIBAN, : AND ORDER
AL QATOA/ISLAMIC ARMY, :
SHIEKH USAMAH BIN-MUHAMMAD
BIN-LADEN a/k/a Osama Bin Laden, :
SADDAM HUSSEIN, THE REPUBLIC :
OF IRAQ :
•

Defendants.

Hon. HAROLD BAER, JR., District Judge: