[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 207 (Friday, December 22, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S19261]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      SENATE RESOLUTION 203--RELATIVE TO THE SENATE LEGAL COUNSEL

  Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. Daschle) submitted the following 
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

                              S. Res. 203

       Whereas, in the case of Sheila Cherry v. Richard Cherry, 
     Case No. FM-18145-91, pending in the New Jersey Superior 
     Court, a subpoena duces tecum for testimony at a deposition 
     and for the production of documents has been issued to 
     William Ayala, an employee of Senator Frank Lautenberg;
       Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United 
     States and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no 
     evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate 
     may, by the judicial process, be taken from such control or 
     possession but by permission of the Senate;
       Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 
     in the possession of the Senate may promote the 
     administration of justice, the Senate will take such action 
     as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
     privileges of the Senate;
       Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the 
     Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 288b(a) 
     and 288c(a)(2) (1994), the Senate may direct its counsel to 
     represent committees, Members, officers, and employees of the 
     Senate with respect to subpoenas or orders to them in their 
     official capacity: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That William Ayala is authorized to testify in 
     the case of Cherry v. Cherry, except concerning matters for 
     which a privilege or an objection should be asserted.
       Sec. 2. That the Senate Legal Counsel is directed to 
     represent William Ayala and Senator Lautenberg's office in 
     connection with the subpoena issued in this case.

                          ____________________