STATE DEPARTMENT LEGAL CONCERNS RE LAOTIAN OPERATIONS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP72-00310R000100080018-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: T
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 8, 2002
• Sequence Number: 18
• Publication Date: February 12, 1970
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Releaae 2002/)211: CIA-RDP72-00310R000"0080018-0
12 February 1970
OGC Has Reviewed
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence
SUBJECT: State Department Legal Concerns Re Laotian
Operations
REFERENCE: Memo for DCI fr
Subject
dtd 20 Jan 70, Same
1. This memorandum is for information only.
25X1A
2. In the referent memorandum I pointed out 25X1A
that a State Department lawyer in a memorandum of 22 December 1969
had taken the position that the Church Amendment apparently renders
illegal the expenditure of funds for the "exploitation" activities
conducted. in the Army's Prairie Fire operation in south Laos.
3. The Church Amendment which was adopted after lengthy
Senate debate in secret session and in open session is a modification
of the earlier Cooper Amendment and provides as follows:
In line with the expressed intention of the President
of the United States, none of the funds appropriated
by this Act shall be used to finance the introduction
of armed ground combat troops into Laos or Thailand.
It is our view that the language does not prohibit the exploitation activities
of Prairie Fire. We do not believe the words themselves so prohibit and
particularly so in view of the context of the floor debate in which the
language was adopted. The proponents of the Amendment on many
occasions stated they did not intend to prohibit any activities then being
conducted. Senator Church himself stated: "We are simply not
undertaking to make any changes in the status quo. "
25X1A
25X1A
This document has
been downgraded to
S
of
ToNN1~4&08
9/ 1
fj72-00310 OR0001 00080018-
El
 Approved For Rele a 2002/10//fytIA-RDP72=00310R000960080018-0
4. Apparently the State Department proposed that their view
be incorporated in a joint State-DOD message to the Ambassador in
Laos. At that time Defense Department lawyers disagreed with State
Department's legal interpretation and the Joint Chiefs of Staff vigorously
objected to any such views being sent to the Ambassador. As of
yesterday, apparently that message has not left but there is no pressure
to include the State Department's view.
5. I have discussed this in. some detail with Maurice H. Lanman,
Assistant: General Counsel, OSD, and William Woodruff, Counsel, Senate
Appropriations Committee. Both agree with the Agency view on this
and think the State Department legal view is simply wrong.
6.. As a matter of interest, I discussed with Messrs. Lanman
and Woodruff the question of whether this Amendment was an unconstitutional
limitation of the powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief. It
has been Larry Houston's and the undersigned's view that while this is
essentially a legal question, probably it is unconstitutional. Mr. Woodruff
quite naturally argued that it was constitutional pointing out, among
other things, that the President had signed the bill containing the wording.
Mr. Lanman was more or less on the fence. In any event, all of us 25X1A
agree that this is a highly theoretical legal argument since the matter
is essentially a political question.
eputy Genera Counsel
Distribution:
Cy 1 - DCI - ret'd OGC 13 Feb 70
Cy2-I)DCI
Cy 3 - ExDir-Compt
Cy4-I)DP
Cy 5 - Legislative Counsel
Cy 6 - D/PPS
Cy 7 - D/Finance
Cy 8 - C/FE
Cy 9 -
OGC: JSW: mks
Approved For Release 2002/10/21":/CIA-RDP72-00310R000100080018-0
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/10/21 : CIA-RDP72-0031 OR000100080018-0
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/10/21 : CIA-RDP72-0031 OR000100080018-0