What Is an ICE Administrative Warrant and What Legal Authority Does It Confer?

ICE WARRANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITY What is an ICE administrative warrant and what legal authority does it confer? In March 2017, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued a new policy regarding immigration detainers and administrative immigration warrants, or “ICE warrants.”1 The policy directs that all ICE detainers shall be accompanied by immigration warrants signed by an authorized ICE officer. An “ICE warrant” is not a real warrant. ICE warrants are administrative forms issued by ICE officers, without any review by a judge.2 An ICE warrant is similar to an ICE detainer, although it derives from different federal regulations. Neither an ICE detainer nor an ICE warrant provides authority for a local law enforcement agency to arrest or detain someone for civil immigration violations. This advisory analyzes the legal authority of ICE warrants, with specific regard to their meaning for local law enforcement officers. I. What is an ICE Warrant? An “ICE warrant” is a form issued by certain immigration officers that names an allegedly deportable non-citizen and directs various federal immigration enforcement agents to arrest that individual.3 ICE can issue an arrest warrant at the same time as, or after, they issue a Notice to Appear for removal proceedings.4 ICE warrants are administrative warrants that “do not grant the same authority as a criminal search or an arrest warrant.”5 Unlike criminal warrants, an ICE warrant is not reviewed or issued by a neutral magistrate. Further, it does not confer authority to enter private spaces to execute an arrest or search.6 An ICE warrant does not compel any local law enforcement officer to take action of any kind; it is exclusively directed to ICE agents.7 Federal regulations authorize immigration warrants to be generated at any time following the issuance of a Notice to Appear for removal proceedings.8 The Notice to Appear itself does not authorize arrest, and is not reviewed by a judge until much later in removal proceedings. The sufficiency or validity of the warrant or the arrest action is never reviewed by a judge at all. The implementing regulations for ICE warrants focus on which agents have authority to issue or execute a warrant, and what training is required for them before receiving that authority.9 All of the officers authorized to issue and execute administrative arrest warrants are federal agents, not local law enforcement officers or agencies. Contact Lena Graber, [email protected] with questions about this document. 1 See Immigration and Customs Enforcement Policy Number 10074.2, Issuance of Immigration Detainers by ICE Immigration Officers, (March 24, 2017) available at https://www.ice.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Document/2017/10074-2.pdf. ICE also provided a revised detainer form and updated immigration warrant forms, available at https://www.ice.gov/detainer-policy. An immigration detainer is a request from federal immigration authorities to a local, state or federal law enforcement agency to provide them with notice prior to releasing the subject of the detainer, in order for ICE to arrange to take custody. 8 CFR § 287.7(a). 2 8 C.F.R. § 287.5(e). 3 See 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (“On a warrant issued by the Attorney General, an alien may be arrested and detained pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removed from the United States.”). See also 8 C.F.R. § 287.5(e) (listing the various categories of immigration officials authorized to issue or execute immigration warrants). ICE warrants may be referred to as removal warrants or arrest warrants. An I-200 arrest warrant is for an allegedly deportable immigrant who does not already have a removal order against her, while an I-205 is issued subsequent to a removal order. A blank sample ICE warrant is available on ICE’s website at: https://www.ice.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Document/2017/I-200_SAMPLE.PDF. (An I-203 or I- 203a is an order to detain or release the person. This is described in the ICE Detention Standards for purposes of making preliminary custody and bond determinations. This document is administrative and has no legal force, and is unlikely to affect local law enforcement unless they contract with ICE for immigration detention.) 4 8 C.F.R. § 236.1. 5 Letter from Karin Lang, ICE Office of Congressional Relations, to Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, March 14, 2007. Karin Lang’s letter refers to ICE warrants on Form I-205, which are based on an order of removal by an Immigration Judge. 6 See See v. City of Seattle, 387 U.S. 541 (1967) (holding that administrative entry to areas not open to the public may only be compelled through the warrant procedure); El-Badrawi v. Dep’t of Homeland Security, 579 F. Supp. 2d 249, 275 (D. Conn. 2008) (“That is why, as a matter of federal constitutional law, search warrants issued exclusively by executive officials involved in an investigation are ignored for Fourth Amendment purposes.”). 7 See 8 C.F.R. § 287.5. 8 8 C.F.R. § 236.1. See also 8 C.F.R. § 287.8(c). 9 8 C.F.R. § 287.5(e). OFFICES IN SAN FRANCISCO AND WASHINGTON D.C. | WWW.ILRC.ORG |MAY 2017 1 ICE WARRANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITY II. Implications of ICE Warrants for Local Law Enforcement Agencies ICE warrants do not generally provide a basis for a local or state law enforcement officer or agency (LEA) to arrest or detain an individual. This includes prolonging the detention of someone who is subject to an ICE detainer and/or ICE warrant but who would otherwise be released. Federal courts have ruled that holding an individual beyond the conclusion of their criminal case constitutes a new seizure that must meet Fourth Amendment requirements.10 Additionally, such a seizure must be within the lawful authority of the local agency under state law. 11 ICE warrants cannot meet these requirements. First, “ICE warrants” are not constitutionally valid warrants because they are not reviewed by a judge or neutral magistrate. Second, no legal authority contemplates local or state officers executing an administrative ICE warrant, even if it were constitutionally valid. Third, ICE warrants are for civil immigration arrests, and local law enforcement agencies lack authority to arrest or detain individuals for civil immigration violations.12 A. ICE Warrants Do Not Satisfy Requirements of the Fourth Amendment An “ICE warrant” is not a real warrant. Unlike the warrant requirements of the Fourth Amendment, ICE warrants are issued by the immigration enforcement agency itself, without any review by a neutral magistrate.13 Federal courts have repeatedly found that such warrants do not meet basic Fourth Amendment requirements, and therefore actions taken on the basis of such warrants are evaluated as if there were no warrant at all.14 For local law enforcement to detain an individual pursuant to an ICE warrant may violate the Fourth Amendment, and in addition could constitute false imprisonment under state law. In Coolidge v. New Hampshire, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a warrant issued by the attorney general was invalid, specifically because the attorney general was in charge of prosecution and therefore he could not be a neutral and detached magistrate.15 ICE warrants, issued by agents of the Department of Homeland Security, similarly lack any imprimatur of neutral or detached findings to support probable cause for arrest. The District of Connecticut found that seizure based on an immigration warrant should nonetheless be evaluated as a warrantless arrest, because an ICE warrant is issued by an agent, not a judge.16 B. There is No Authority for Local Law Enforcement Officers to Execute ICE Warrant An ICE warrant does not confer any arrest authority to a local law enforcement officer. Federal regulations allow a specific list of federal immigration agents to execute immigration arrest warrants. 17 This does not include any local law enforcement agents or delegate arrest authority to such officers. Rather, the list of officers empowered to execute such warrants is specifically enumerated and limited to federal immigration officials.18 The U.S. Supreme Court noted in Arizona v. United States that only authorized, trained immigration agents execute such warrants. 19 Local law enforcement officers generally lack any authority to detain someone on the basis of an ICE warrant. 10 Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405, 407 (2005); Gonzales v. Peoria, 722 F.2d 468 (9th Cir. 1983) (“The chief of police expressed the conviction that ‘detaining’ persons in custody for suspected violations of the Act is different from arresting them. There is no constitutional distinction between these procedures.”); Melendres v. Arpaio, 695 F.3d 990, 1000 (9th Cir. 2012); Morales v. Chadbourne, 793 F.3d 208, 217 (1st Cir. 2015); Miranda-Olivares v. Clackamas Co., No. 3:12-cv-02317-ST (D.Or. April 11, 2014). 11 See United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 589 (1948). See also Melendres v. Arpaio, 695 F.3d 990, 1000 (9th Cir. 2012). 12 Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 2506 (2012). 13 8 C.F.R. § 287.5(e). 14 Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 US 443 (1971) (finding a warrant issued by the Attorney General to be invalid because he was not a neutral magistrate); Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10 (1948) (Fourth Amendment protection consists in requiring that those “inferences be drawn b y a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime.”); El-Badrawi v. Dep’t of Homeland Security, 579 F. Supp.

Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 40 of the Covenant Armenia*, ** International Covenant On

United Nations CCPR/C/ARM/2-3 International Covenant on Distr.: General 22 November 2010 Civil and Political Rights Original: English Human Rights Committee Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant Joint second and third periodic reports of States parties Armenia*, ** [28 April 2010] * In accordance with the information transmitted to States parties regarding the processing of their reports, the present document was not formally edited before being sent to the United Nations translation services. ** Annexes can be consulted in the files of the Secretariat. GE.10-46857 (E) 031210 CCPR/C/ARM/2-3 Contents Paragraphs Page I. Introduction. 1–12 3 II. Implementation of the Covenant. 13–670 5 Article 1 . 13–66 5 Article 2 . 67–106 12 Article 3 . 107–152 18 Article 4 . 153–175 24 Article 5 . 176–179

Out of County Felony Arrests What is the procedure when a suspect is arrested for a felony that occurred in another county? Specifically, may officers immediately transport the suspect to the county in which the crime occurred, or must they first take him before a judge in the county of arrest? As we will explain in this article, it depends on two things: (1) Did the suspect have a right to a bail hearing in the county of arrest? (2) If the suspect is transported, will he be arraigned within the required time limits? There are a few other issues that might arise, and we will cover them, too. No-bail warrant If the suspect was arrested on a no-bail felony warrant, he does not have a right to a bail hearing in the county of arrest.1 He may therefore be transported without delay to the county in which the crime occurred. If the arrest was made by local officers, they must “immediately” notify officers in the county in which the warrant was issued that their suspect is in custody.2 Those officers must then pick up the suspect without unnecessary delay but, in any event, within five calendar days if the two counties are 400 miles apart or less, or within five court days if the two counties are over 400 miles apart.3 What about arraignment? A suspect must ordinarily be arraigned within 48 hours of his arrest.4 Although the courts will give officers some flexibility when the arrest occurs in a distant county,5 officers should attempt to comply with the 48 hour time limit.

Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Civilian Warrant Applications What is a warrant application hearing? When a civilian makes a written application for the issuance of a criminal arrest warrant, a Judge makes a determination as to whether the application should be set down for a hearing. If the Judge determines that the application should be set down for a hearing, this form is filled out stating the crime alleged and setting down the time, date, and location of the hearing. The Judge delivers one copy to the applicant at the time of the application. The Clerk of Court mails one copy to the defendant at the address provided by the applicant. O.C.G.A. 17-4-40. (b) (1) If application is made for a warrant by a person other than a peace officer or law enforcement officer and the application alleges the commission of an offense against the penal laws, the judge or other officer shall schedule a warrant application hearing as provided in this subsection. O.C.G.A. 17-4-40. (b) (4) At the warrant application hearing, the rules regarding admission of evidence at a commitment hearing shall apply. The person seeking the warrant shall have the customary rights of presentation of evidence and cross- examination of witnesses. The person whose arrest is sought may cross-examine the person or persons applying for the warrant and any other witnesses testifying in support of the application at the hearing. The person whose arrest is sought may present evidence that probable cause does not exist for his or her arrest.

Magistrate's Basic Duties to Appreciate the Role of a Magistrate in the Judicial Process, It Is Necessary to Understand How Magistrates Perform Their Basic Duties

Magistrate's Basic Duties To appreciate the role of a magistrate in the judicial process, it is necessary to understand how magistrates perform their basic duties. To Issue Arrest Warrants Before magistrates can issue an arrest warrant in a criminal case, they must use their discretion to decide if there is "probable cause" to issue a process. Probable cause is a reasonable belief, based on facts that would cause a prudent person to feel that the accused committed the offense. To determine probable cause, magistrates must decide that there are facts logically indicating that the accused committed an offense and there must be some basis for determining that the facts are reliable. The facts are obtained from the complaint which consists of sworn statements of a citizen or a law enforcement officer relating to the commission of an alleged offense. These statements are made under oath before a magistrate and the magistrate may require the sworn statements to be reduced to writing and signed. If the magistrate decides that probable cause exists, an arrest warrant will be issued so that the accused may be brought to trial. To Issue Search Warrants When magistrates issue a search warrant, they are giving a law enforcement officer authority to conduct a search to aid an official investigation. The officer seeking the search warrant must make a complaint, under oath, stating the purpose of the search to the magistrate. The complaint must be supported by a written affidavit from the officer. In issuing the search warrant, the magistrate must describe the place to be searched, the property or person to be searched, and state that the magistrate has found probable cause to believe that the property or person constitutes evidence of a crime or tends to show that a person has committed a crime.

DOUGLAS COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE Policy and Procedure Specific Policies P&P-B-103 Criminal Process/Arrest Procedures Effective Date: 11-10-16 Approval: Sheriff Number of Pages: 6 Supersedes: 01-15-13 References: Reevaluation Date: Standards: CALEA LE 1.1.4, LE 1.2.1, 16-3-101 to 16-3-110 C.R.S. Annually or as needed LE 1.2.5, LE 1.2.6, LE 1.2.7, LE 61.1.2, LE 74.3.1-2 I. POLICY It is the policy of this Office that members should make all arrests quietly, without attracting unnecessary attention or subjecting any prisoner to needless exposure, humiliation or severity. Every arrest shall be made in accordance with the law of the State of Colorado and in strict compliance with all applicable laws and the Constitution of the United States. , , , , II. CRIMINAL PROCESS PROCEDURE A. For the purposes of this order, an arrest is the taking of a person into custody, as authorized by law. Commissioned personnel, as peace officers, may make an arrest with or without a warrant. An arrest warrant is a court issued document authorizing the arrest of an individual for a specified criminal charge based upon sufficient probable cause. . B. The person making the arrest must inform the person to be arrested of the intention to arrest him or her, of the cause of the arrest, and the authority to make the arrest, except when the member making the arrest has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested is actually engaged in the commission of or the attempt to commit an offense, or the person to be arrested is pursued immediately after its completion, or after an escape.

OPS-405 - ARREST PROCEDURES [1.2.1, 1.2.5] Amends/Supersedes: OPS-405 (02/27/2019) Date of Issue: 03/26/2021

Newport News Police Department - Operational Manual OPS-405 - ARREST PROCEDURES [1.2.1, 1.2.5] Amends/Supersedes: OPS-405 (02/27/2019) Date of Issue: 03/26/2021 I. GENERAL A. When making an arrest, the officer: 1. Will take into consideration the safety of bystanders in the area of arrest, the suspect being arrested, and their own safety. 2. Should pick the place, time, and location of the arrest to give the best tactical advantage, as conditions allow. 3. Shall verbally announce the arrest prior to any physical seizure of an individual when reasonably possible. 4. Will be in uniform, and/or shall display their badge of office. 5. Will, prior to placing the arrested individual in a patrol vehicle, conduct a search incident to arrest (see OPS-410 Searching Arrested Persons). The transporting/receiving officer is responsible for searching or observing the search of any detainee placed in their vehicle. A search must be conducted any time care and control of the detainee is transferred from one officer to another. B. While making an arrest based on the execution of any warrant or other legal service: 1. It is mandatory to verify that the person named in the legal document is the person being detained. This includes (but is not limited to): a. Pictorial identification; b. Driver’s license; c. Identification by social security number; or d. Fingerprints prior to arrest for comparison to known fingerprints of the person named in the arresting document. 2. If the identity of the suspect being detained is questionable, or cannot be determined via the prior means, a supervisor should be consulted before any arrest is made.

POLICY WARRANT ARREST 501.5 REVISED: 2/98, 11/07, 12/13, RELATED POLICIES: 501.1, 501.2, 501.3, 07/15,10/20 501.4, 501.6, 501.7, 501.8, 501.9, 501.10 CFA STANDARDS: REVIEWED: AS NEEDED A. WARRANT ARREST Only sworn officers may execute arrest warrants. An officer who is notified that an active warrant/capias exists for a subject being detained will take every step reasonable to ensure that the subject is properly identified, before effecting the arrest. This can be accomplished through verification of supporting evidence such as height, weight, eye and hair color, scars, marks, tattoos or other unusual features. Driver's license, Social Security numbers or any other reasonable identifying factors may be considered. 1. Upon determining that the subject matches the warrant, the arrest will be made and proper F.C.I.C./N.C.I.C. notification will be completed through Teletype and documented in an offense report and probable cause affidavit. 2. The offense report and probable cause affidavit will contain those elements on which the officer made this verification determination. B. SUBJECT INSIDE BUILDING OR RESIDENCE 1. When an officer has the legal right to be inside a building or residence, the officer will follow set guidelines as stated in section A. 2. Entry of building or residence to effect an arrest: a. Among the many methods fugitives may employ to evade capture, concealment in a private building (without public access) or residence is a primary technique. An arrest warrant allows the search of such a private building or residence, but only under the following conditions; (1).

Victim’s statement to the police. Judge signs arrest warrant. Defendant arrested and brought before the District Court. Felony: No plea taken. Bail set by a Misdemeanor: If defendant pleads not guilty, bail is District Court judge. If defendant is set and pre-trial conference scheduled. If defendant held without bail, a Bail Hearing may pleads guilty or nolo, case is disposed of and defendant be held. sentenced. If there is no plea, trial by judge will follow. Information Charging: Case presented to Grand Jury: Case presented to Grand Jury by prosecuting attorney. the Office of the Attorney General by The victims and witnesses testify as to their account of the offense. police. Police department prosecution A police detective, doctor (if applicable), social worker (if officer presents the case to a prosecuting applicable), and any other professional involved in the case also attorney who reviews it and determines if testifies when necessary. The defendant is not present and does not there is enough evidence to charge the testify. No defense attorney is present. Usually defendants are not defendant. informed of the Grand Jury proceedings until an indictment is returned. Grand Jury proceedings are initially secret. No information. The Information. The defendant No true bill. defendant is not charged. is charged. True bill. (Indictment) The case is not charged Defendant formally due to insufficient charged. evidence or other reasons. All records of the Grand Jury Superior Court proceedings are then sealed. Pre-arraignment Conference: Possible settlement via negotiation. Arraignment: Bail is reset. Pre-trial Conference: Possible settlement of case via “plea agreement.” Trial Sentencing: If found guilty, defendant’s sentence ranges from simple probation to maximum allowable sentence at the Adult Correctional Institutions.

City of Bellingham Classification Specification - Civil Service or AFSCME CLASS TITLE Warrant Officer DEPARTMENT Police UNION: 114 SG: 13 CS: Yes FLSA: Y EE04CODE: PS NATURE OF WORK: Incumbents are responsible for receiving and serving court documents and for the transportation and extradition of prisoners. Serve and process court orders from Bellingham Municipal, Whatcom District and Whatcom Superior Courts, and other jurisdictions. These orders include all classes of arrest warrants, subpoenas, summons, and domestic violence papers (no contact, restraining, and protection orders) and anti-harassment orders. The Warrant Officer is also responsible for the service of other types of legal process, both civil and criminal, from the Municipal Court, City Attorney's office, and the Bellingham Police Department. Provides security services for Municipal Court. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS: The Warrant Officer classification is distinguished from Police Officer by its limited commission and duties. The work of this classification is focused on serving warrants, subpoenas and restraining orders. The Police Officer exercises the full range of general duty police work to protect life and property through the enforcement of laws and ordinances and emergency response. The Warrant Officer has the authority to make an arrest only after a court has issued an arrest warrant or when ordered by a judge to transport a prisoner to jail for contempt of court, sentencing or revocation of probation. This contrasts with a Police Officer who can make an arrest for an observed violation of the law. SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIPS: Reports to an assigned Sergeant. Works independently under the guidance of applicable federal, State, City and departmental laws, rules, and regulations.

Rule 431*(E)-(R). Procedure when Defendant Arrested with Warrant. (D) Warrants of arrest shall be issued for execution only to police officers as defined in Rule 103 who have on file with the issuing authority signed and dated verifications that all facts set forth in any return of service being made by the police officer are being set forth in each such return of service as true and correct to the best of the police officer’s knowledge, information and belief under the understanding that false statements therein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. (E) When an arrest warrant is returned where the defendant has been found, the issuing authority shall ensure that the return of service by the police officer confirms: (1) that the defendant has signed a guilty plea and has paid the amount of fine and cost stated on the warrant; or (2) that the defendant has signed a not guilty plea and has paid the full amount of collateral stated on the warrant; or (3) that the defendant has paid fine and cost due as specified in the warrant if the warrant is for collection of fine and cost after guilty plea or conviction. (F) Issuing authorities shall require all police officers as defined in Rule 103 executing warrants of arrest as specified above to: (1) accept payments directly from defendants in cash, check or money order made payable only to the issuing authority’s magisterial district; and (2) forthwith submit to the magisterial district from which the warrant of arrest issued all such payments made payable to issuing authority’s magisterial district and so much of the cash payments collected as are due to the Court for security or fine and Court costs.

European Added Value Assessment The EU Arrest Warrant ANNEX I Critical Assessment of the Existing European Arrest Warrant Framework Decision Research paper by Anne Weyembergh (Prof. ULB, ECLAN Coordinator), with the assistance of Inés Armada (VUB-ULB) and Chloé Brière (ULB) Abstract After ten years of practical implementation of the European Arrest Warrant Framework Decision, this research paper aims to analyse its strengths and weaknesses, and reflect on its future. Twelve main issues are reflected upon. Following a description of each of these issues, including concrete examples, the main arguments for and against action at EU level are presented. Specific solutions are eventually suggested. PE 510.979 I-1 EAVA 6/2013 AUTHOR This research paper has been written by Anne Weyembergh (Prof. Université Libre de Bruxelles, ECLAN Coordinator), with the assistance of Inés Armada (PhD researcher, VUB-ULB) and Chloé Brière (GEM PhD researcher, ULB), at the request of the European Added Value Unit, of the Directorate for Impact Assessment and European Added Value, within the Directorate General for Parliamentary Research Services (DG EPRS) of the General Secretariat of the European Parliament. RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Micaela Del Monte, European Added Value Unit To contact the Unit, please e-mail [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Gisèle Vernimmen-Van Tiggelen (collaboratrice scientifique, Université Libre de Bruxelles, and chef d’unité honoraire, European Commission), Robert Roth (Professor, Université de Genève) and Kasper van der Schaft (Public Prosecutor at the Internationaal Rechtshulp Centrum (IRC/International Legal Assistance Centre)) for their precious comments and observations on the draft report.

Utah Code Chapter 7 Arrest, by Whom, and How Made 77-7-1 "Arrest" defined -- Restraint allowed. An arrest is an actual restraint of the person arrested or submission to custody. The person shall not be subjected to any more restraint than is necessary for his arrest and detention. Enacted by Chapter 15, 1980 General Session 77-7-2 Arrest by peace officers. A peace officer may make an arrest under authority of a warrant or may, without warrant, arrest a person: (1) (a) for any public offense committed or attempted in the presence of any peace officer; and (b) as used in this Subsection (1), "presence" includes all of the physical senses or any device that enhances the acuity, sensitivity, or range of any physical sense, or records the observations of any of the physical senses; (2) when the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe a felony or a class A misdemeanor has been committed and has reasonable cause to believe that the person arrested has committed it; (3) when the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense, and there is reasonable cause for believing the person may: (a) flee or conceal himself to avoid arrest; (b) destroy or conceal evidence of the commission of the offense; or (c) injure another person or damage property belonging to another person; (4) when the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe the person has committed the offense of failure to disclose identity under Section 76-8-301.5; or (5) when the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person is an alien: (a) subject to a civil removal order issued by an immigration judge; (b) regarding whom a civil detainer warrant has been issued by the federal Department of Homeland Security; or (c) who has been charged or convicted in another state with one or more aggravated felonies as defined by 8 U.S.C.