My Adopted Box O' Docs

I got my box assignment from Generalissimo in the Great "Adopt A Box O' Docs" Caper, and it's the one I requested nearly at random (it was still available, and I like the number 11 just fine). I have Box 45-JGR/Pro Bono (11).

When I opened my doc box and checked the page count, my first reaction was, "Holy Cow!" Fifty-four pages. Generalissimo's box only had 4 pages, and one of those was the title page. Actually, the first page of mine is also a title page, so maybe it's not so bad.

It turns out there are only three topics in the box.

Topic 1:

This spans pages 2 through 44, and it covers the possible extension of Section 120 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Page 2 is a memo from John G. Roberts to Fred F. Fielding, Counsel to the President, dated October 10, 1984. The body of the memo follows (retyped by me--this is not a faked memo):

On September, 19, I submitted draft replies for your signature to letters Mr. Baker received from ABA President Wallace D. Riley and former ABA Presidednt (sic) Morris Harrell. Riley and Harrell wrote Baker to urge that the Administration act to prevent Section 120 of the Internal Revenue Code from expiring. As I explained in my memorandum, Section 120 grants preferred tax treatment for employer-funded legal assistance programs for employees. Unless extended by Congress it will expire at the end of this year pursuant to a sunset provision.

The draft replies I submitted noted that the Administration, in Treasury testimony, opposed extension of Section 120. You wrote back that the replies were difficult for you to send, because you needed the support of Riley and Harell on another matter. The attached revised draft omits the reference to the Administration position, simply thanking the two for their views and assuring them that they will be appropriately considered.

The pages that follow include draft copies of the replies, a memo from Fielding to Peter J. Wallison (General Counsel U.S. Dept. of the Treasury), the September 19 drafts of the replies, the actual replies from Fred Fielding, the original letters to James A. Baker III (White House Chief of Staff and Assistant to the President) received from Riley and Harrell, a statement made by Patrick J. Keating on behalf of the ABA to the Senate Committee on Finance in favor of the extension (this one had a couple of hard-luck stories about people whose lives went down the tubes for lack of accessible/affordable legal advice), and finally a statement made by Robert G. Woodward (Tax Legislative Counsel Department of the Treasury) to the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures (covering five different bills, including this one (HR 5028) and stating the reasons Treasury wanted Section 120 to expire).

I don't see a whole lot that Roberts's critics can use against him, beyond a charge of bowing to political expediency in having dropped wording that might have endangered Riley and Harrell's support on another issue. But this would be a huge stretch.

Topic 2:

This one is more fun. I've heard Hugh and some of the Fox News commentators mentioning that Roberts has a reputation for his sense of humor slipping into his documents. This is one of those documents. It's covered by pages 45 through 50.

This is concerning a reply to a letter to President Reagan received from Mrs. Helen F. Boehm of the Boehm porcelain company. Mrs. Boehm was inspired by a quote by President Reagan ("to make America great again and let the Eagle soar") to create a line of Boehm china that featured patriotic eagles. She hoped to use President Reagan's quote, along with mention of his name as the source of the quote, in a brochure promoting the new line of china. Roberts, in his memo to Fred Fielding, dated October 10, 1984, says in part:

The brochure as presently designed may convey the false impression that the President has endorsed “The Great American Heritage Collection.” This would not only contravene established White House policy concerning endorsement of commercial products, but also, given this particular pattern, call into serious question the President’s taste in dinner service. Of course, only the former point need be made in the reply to Mrs. Boehm. The attached draft reply also raises a cautionary note about the use of the collection to raise funds for the party. Since Mrs. Boehm is reportedly a personal friend of the Reagans, I have prepared a memorandum to [Katherine]Shepherd [Presidential Correspondence Office] in order that the proposed reply may be reviewed by her office before being sent. (emphasis added)

Unfortunately, no copy of the proposed brochure or china pattern is included in the box.

Topic 3:

This is regarding a request from Brother John Foster, Director and Founder of the Kids for Christ Foundation of Portsmouth, Ohio, for permission for the President to declare October 13 - 21 Child Abuse Awareness Week. The memo from Roberts to Fielding, dated October 12, 1984, states in part:

The week was chosen because there will be a seminar on the subject in Portsmouth at that time. Foster is requesting Presidential permission because some misguided bureaucrat in the city manager’s office told him it was required.

Portsmouth, of course, can have any week it wants without Presidential permission. (emphasis added)

What can the Roberts critics do with this one? Perhaps accuse him of heartlessly casting aspersions on essential city personnel. Not much else.

Final comments:

These three topics don't say much about how Roberts will approach his time on the Supreme Court. I think I like Roberts's sense of humor, though. It could make for some entertaining reading in future Supreme Court decisions. And isn't that what this whole confirmation debate is about?