page no 158 note 1 For excerpts from the Department of State’s previously stated views on Avigliano, submitted to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on October 17, 1978, see infra at p. 197. The views can be found in their entirety in 73 AJIL (1979) at pp. 282–84.

page no 159 note 2 Dept. of State File No. P79 0150–2305 and 2306.

page no 160 note 1 For the Consular Convention and the Protocol thereto between the United States and the Soviet Union, signed June 1, 1964 (entered into force July 13, 1968), see TIAS No. 6503, 19 UST 5018.

page no 161 note 2 Dept. of State File Nos. P79 0129–0787 and P79 0140–0037.

page no 162 note 1 Dept. of State File Nos. P76 0130–1551, P76 0135–0265, P79 0108–1329, P78 0100–2090, P79 0108–1331, P79 0108–1336, and P79 0096–0753.

page no 168 note 1 The Department of State revised its regulation governing passport issuance in cases where custody of a minor is in controversy, by a final rule issued June 28, 1979, effective August 17, 1979. In such instances, the passport-issuing office may refuse to issue a passport to the minor if it receives a court order from a court within the country in which passport services are sought, either giving custody of the minor to the objecting parent, legal guardian, or person in loco parentis, or forbidding the child’s departure from the country in which passport services are sought without the court’s permission (44 Fed. Reg. 41,777 (1979), to be codified in 22 C.F.R. §5l.27(d)).

page no 170 note 2 The rule referred to in note 1 supra revised the Department’s regulation prohibiting issuance of passports, except for direct return to the United States, in cases where the applicant is subject to a court order, conditions of probation, or conditions of parole, any of which forbid departure from the United States, to apply to criminal cases also where the applicant’s departure could subject the applicant to the Federal Fugitive Felon Act (18 U.S.C. §1073) (to be codified in 22 C.F.R. $51.70(a)(2)).

Title 22, C.F.R., part 71, subpart B sets out regulations covering emergency medical-dietary and other assistance for U.S. nationals incarcerated abroad who are otherwise unable to obtain such services. They were established pursuant to Pub. L. 95–45, §3, June 15, 1977, 91 Stat. 221, 22 U.S.C. §267Q(j).

page no 179 note 1 Dept. of State File No. P79 0132–2117.

page no 179 note 1 Dept. of State File No. P79 0150–2330.

page no 179 note 2 Footnotes to Assistant Secretary Atwood’s letter are as follows:

a The jurisdictional analysis generally follows the approach taken by the American Law institute’s Restatement (Second) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States.

b Examples of the use of the nationality principle are provisions of U.S. statutory law relating to collection of internal revenue, treason, selective service, and the subpoena power, which are applicable and can be enforced against U.S. nationals wherever they are found.

c United States v. Aluminum Company of America, 148 F.2d 416, 443 (2d Cir. 1945).

d Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of America, 549 F.2d 597, 609 (9th Cir. 1977).

e Restatement (Second), Foreign Relations Law of the United States, §40; see also Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of America, supra.

f See discussion in Brewster, K., Antitrust and American Business Abroad, at pp. 339–349, 446–448 (1958)Google Scholar.

g Preamble and Article 45 of the Agreement on an International Energy Program, signed November 18, 1974, 27 UST 1685, TIAS 8278.

h See, e.g., paragraphs 1.2 and III.2 of the IEA’s Long–Term Cooperation Program, adopted by the Governing Board on January 30, 1976, 27 UST 231, TIAS 8229.

i Declaration of OECD Member Governments on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises, June 21, 1976.

j Decision of the OECD Council on International Investment Incentives and Disincentives, June 21, 1976; Revised Decision of the OECD Council on Inter-Governmental Procedures for Multinational Enterprises, June 13, 1979.

page no 183 note 3 Dept. of State File No. P79 0150–2322.