Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Garcia, Michael John" in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Unaccompanied Alien Children-Legal Issues: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions [July 18, 2014]
"Recent reports about the increasing number of alien minors apprehended at the U.S. border without a parent or legal guardian have prompted numerous questions about so-called unaccompanied alien children (UACs). Some of these questions pertain to the numbers of children involved, their reasons for coming to the United States, and current and potential responses of the federal government and other entities to their arrival. Other questions concern the interpretation and interplay of various federal statutes and regulations, administrative and judicial decisions, and settlement agreements pertaining to alien minors. This report addresses the latter questions, providing general and relatively brief answers to 14 frequently asked questions regarding UACs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manuel, Kate; Garcia, Michael John
2014-07-18
-
U.S. Military Action Against the Islamic State: Answers to Frequently Asked Legal Questions [September 9, 2014]
"This report addresses select legal questions raised by the use of military force against IS [Islamic State]. Questions addressed in this report include potential sources (and limitations) of presidential authority to use military force against the Islamic State without congressional authorization; the potential relevance of the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq (2002 Iraq AUMF; P.L. 107-243) and the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 AUMF; P.L. 107-40); the applicability of the United Nations Charter to ongoing U.S. military strikes in Iraq and any prospective strikes against IS forces in Syria; and the constraints imposed by the War Powers Resolution upon U.S. military action that has not been authorized by Congress. The report will be updated as warranted by events. Many of the legal issues discussed in this report concerning congressional oversight of U.S. military action are addressed in greater detail in CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report R41989, 'Congressional Authority to Limit Military Operations', by Jennifer K. Elsea, Michael John Garcia, and Thomas J. Nicola. Further discussion regarding recent developments in Iraq and Syria can be found in CRS Report RS21968, 'Iraq: Politics, Governance, and Human Rights', by Kenneth Katzman; CRS Report R43612, 'Iraq Crisis and U.S. Policy', by Kenneth Katzman et al.; and CRS Report RL33487, 'Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response', coordinated by Christopher M. Blanchard."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2014-09-09
-
Unlawfully Present Aliens, Driver's Licenses, and Other State-Issued ID: Select Legal Issues [March 28, 2014]
"One aspect of the broader debate over aliens who are present in the United States in violation of federal immigration law has been their eligibility for driver's licenses and other forms of state-issued identification documents (IDs). The issuance of driver's licenses has historically been considered a state matter, and states have taken a variety of approaches. Some have barred the issuance of driver's licenses and other state-issued ID to unlawfully present aliens; others permit their issuance; and yet others instead grant unlawfully present aliens Certificates for Driving (CFDs) or Driving Privilege Cards (DPCs). CFDs or DPCs expressly state, on their face, that they are valid for driving, but not for other purposes. The federal government has generally not intruded on state control over the issuance of driver's licenses, although the REAL ID Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-13, Div. B) will, when implemented, bar federal agencies from accepting, 'for any official purpose,' licenses or ID cards issued by states that do not meet specific requirements. Regardless of whether they would deny or grant driver's licenses and other state-issued ID to unlawfully present aliens, such state measures have been challenged on various grounds. While these grounds can vary depending upon the specific statute or practice in question, the grounds most commonly asserted appear to be violations of the Equal Protection and Supremacy Clauses of the U.S. Constitution."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manuel, Kate; Garcia, Michael John
2014-03-28
-
State and Local 'Sanctuary' Policies Limiting Participation in Immigration Enforcement [March 28, 2014]
"This report discusses legal issues related to state and local measures that limit law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The report begins by providing a brief overview of the constitutional principles informing the relationship between federal immigration authorities and state and local jurisdictions, including the federal government's power to preempt state and local activities under the Supremacy Clause, and the Tenth Amendment's proscription against Congress directly 'commandeering' the states to administer a federally enacted regulatory scheme. The report then discusses various types of measures adopted or considered by states and localities to limit their participation in federal immigration enforcement efforts, including (1) limiting police investigations into the immigration status of persons with whom they come in contact; (2) declining to honor federal immigration authorities' requests that certain aliens be held until those authorities may assume custody; (3) shielding certain unlawfully present aliens from detection by federal immigration authorities; and (4) amending or applying state criminal laws so as to reduce or eliminate the immigration consequences that might result from an alien's criminal conviction."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John; Manuel, Kate
2014-03-28
-
Wartime Detention Provisions in Recent Defense Authorization Legislation [June 23, 2014]
"In recent years, Congress has included provisions in annual defense authorization bills addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and, more broadly, the disposition of persons captured in the course of hostilities against Al Qaeda and associated forces. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 (2012 NDAA; P.L. 112-81) arguably constituted the most significant legislation informing wartime detention policy since the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF; P.L. 107-40), which serves as the primary legal authority for U.S. operations against Al Qaeda and associated forces. Much of the debate surrounding passage of the 2012 NDAA centered on what appeared to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the AUMF in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. But the 2012 NDAA addressed other issues as well, including the continued detention of persons at Guantanamo. Both the 2013 NDAA (P.L. 112-239) and the 2014 NDAA (P.L. 113-66) also contain subtitles addressing U.S. detention policy, though neither act addresses detention matters as comprehensively as did the 2012 NDAA. The competing House and Senate defense authorization bills for FY2015 (H.R. 4435 and S. 2410) also contain provisions addressing the continued detention of Guantanamo detainees."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2014-06-23
-
NATO Enlargement: Senate Advice and Consent [January 15, 2010]
"Each enlargement of NATO has raised the question of whether Senate advice and consent is necessary. The North Atlantic Treaty itself simply provides that any enlargement must be approved by all of the member states 'in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.' In giving its advice and consent to the treaty in 1949, the Senate did not impose a formal condition regarding its participation in future enlargements of NATO. But it did obtain an explicit commitment from the Truman Administration that all proposed enlargements of NATO would be submitted to the Senate for its advice and consent. That commitment has been honored. All proposals to enlarge NATO have been submitted to the Senate; and the Senate has invariably given its assent (although in recent times subject to a number of conditions). This report describes the provisions of the North Atlantic Treaty and of the original Senate debate in 1949 pertinent to enlargement and the procedures that have been followed for each subsequent enlargement proposal. It also discusses what the Senate did with respect to the reunification of Germany in 1990 and the implications of that event for Germany's membership in NATO."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John
2010-01-15
-
International Law and Agreements: Their Effect Upon U.S. Law [January 23, 2014]
"This report provides an introduction to the roles that international law and agreements play in the United States. International law is derived from two primary sources-international agreements and customary practice. Under the U.S. legal system, international agreements can be entered into by means of a treaty or an executive agreement. The Constitution allocates primary responsibility for entering into such agreements to the executive branch, but Congress also plays an essential role. First, in order for a treaty (but not an executive agreement) to become binding upon the United States, the Senate must provide its advice and consent to treaty ratification by a two-thirds majority. Secondly, Congress may authorize congressional-executive agreements. Thirdly, many treaties and executive agreements are not self-executing, meaning that implementing legislation is required to provide U.S. bodies with the domestic legal authority necessary to enforce and comply with an international agreement's provisions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John
2014-01-23
-
National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 and Beyond: Detainee Matters [January 27, 2014]
"The 2012 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] authorizes the detention of certain categories of persons and requires the military detention of a subset of them (subject to waiver by the President); regulates status determinations for persons held pursuant to the AUMF; regulates periodic review proceedings concerning the continued detention of Guantanamo detainees; and continued funding restrictions that relate to Guantanamo detainee transfers to foreign countries. During floor debate, significant attention centered on the extent to which the bill and existing law permit the military detention of U.S. citizens believed to be enemy belligerents, especially if arrested within the United States. The enacted version of the bill included a provision to clarify that the bill's affirmation of detention authority under the AUMF is not intended to affect any existing authorities relating to the detention of U.S. citizens or lawful resident aliens, or any other persons captured or arrested in the United States. […] The 2014 NDAA extends the blanket prohibition on transferring Guantanamo detainees to the United States, but allows the Executive greater flexibility in determining whether to transfer detainees to foreign custody. This report offers a brief background of the salient issues raised by the detainee provisions of the FY2012 NDAA, provides a section-by-section analysis, and discusses executive interpretation and implementation of the act's mandatory military detention provision. It also addresses detainee provisions in the 2013 NDAA and 2014 NDAA."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John; Elsea, Jennifer
2014-01-27
-
Judicial Activity Concerning Enemy Combatant Detainees: Major Court Rulings [April 21, 2014]
"This report discusses major judicial opinions concerning suspected enemy belligerents detained in the conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The report addresses all Supreme Court decisions concerning enemy combatants. It also discusses notable circuit court opinions addressing issues of ongoing relevance. In particular, it summarizes notable decisions which have (1) addressed whether the Executive may lawfully detain only persons who are 'part of' Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and affiliated groups, or also those who provide support to such entities in their hostilities against the United States and its allies; (2) adopted a functional approach for assessing whether a person is 'part of' Al Qaeda; (3) decided that a preponderance of evidence standard is appropriate for detainee habeas cases, but suggested that a lower standard might be constitutionally permissible, and instructed courts to assess the cumulative weight of evidence rather than each piece of evidence in isolation; (4) determined that Guantanamo detainees have a limited right to challenge their proposed transfer to foreign custody, but denied courts the authority to order detainees released into the United States; and (5) held that the constitutional writ of habeas does not extend to noncitizen detainees held at U.S.-operated facilities in Afghanistan. Finally, the report discusses a few criminal cases involving persons who were either involved in the 9/11 attacks or were captured abroad by U.S. forces or allies during operations against Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated entities, as well as reviews of military commission cases in federal appellate courts."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2014-04-21
-
U.S. Military Action Against the Islamic State: Answers to Frequently Asked Legal Questions [September 25, 2014]
"Ongoing U.S. military operations against the Islamic State (which formerly referred to itself as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and is also commonly referred to as IS, ISIS, or ISIL) raise issues concerning the allocation of war powers between Congress and the President, including whether such operations have been (or are required to be) authorized by an act of Congress. In August 2014, President Obama ordered U.S. forces to commence airstrikes against IS targets in Iraq to assist the Iraqi government in combating the insurgent force, protect U.S. military and nonmilitary personnel in Iraq, and support certain humanitarian operations. In a public address on September 10, 2014, President Obama announced the pursuit of a strategy to 'degrade and ultimately destroy' the Islamic State, including through the escalation of U.S. airstrikes against IS forces in Iraq, as well as the possible initiation of U.S. airstrikes against IS forces located in neighboring Syria. On September 23, 2014, the United States began airstrikes in Syria targeting IS forces and certain other groups within that country believed to be affiliated with Al Qaeda. As of the date of this report, Congress has not enacted legislation specifically authorizing U.S. force against the Islamic State. In enacting the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015 (P.L. 113-164), which was signed into law on September 19, 2014, Congress authorized the President to arm and train vetted elements of Syrian opposition groups, including for purposes of deterring attacks on the Syrian populace by the Islamic State, but the legislation expressly provides that it does not constitute statutory authorization for the introduction of U.S. forces into actual or imminent hostilities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John; Elsea, Jennifer
2014-09-25
-
National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012: Detainee Matters [December 11, 2012]
"The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 (2012 NDAA; P.L. [Public Law] 112-81) contains a subtitle addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and more broadly, the disposition of persons captured in the course of hostilities against Al Qaeda and associated forces. Much of the debate surrounding passage of the act centered on what appears to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF; P.L. 107-40) in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The 2012 NDAA authorizes the detention of certain categories of persons and requires the military detention of a subset of them (subject to waiver by the President); regulates status determinations for persons held pursuant to the AUMF, regardless of location; regulates periodic review proceedings concerning the continued detention of Guantanamo detainees; and continues current funding restrictions that relate to Guantanamo detainee transfers to foreign countries. The act continues to bar military funds from being used to transfer detainees from Guantanamo into the United States for trial or other purposes, although it does not directly bar criminal trials for terrorism suspects (similar transfer restrictions are found in appropriations enactments in effect for FY2012)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2012-12-11
-
Judicial Activity Concerning Enemy Combatant Detainees: Major Court Rulings [December 11, 2012]
"As part of the conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, the United States has captured and detained numerous persons believed to have been part of or associated with enemy forces. Over the years, federal courts have considered a multitude of petitions by or on behalf of suspected belligerents challenging aspects of U.S. detention policy. Although the Supreme Court has issued definitive rulings concerning several legal issues raised in the conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, many others remain unresolved, with some the subject of ongoing litigation. This report discusses major judicial opinions concerning suspected enemy belligerents detained in the conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The report addresses all Supreme Court decisions concerning enemy combatants. It also discusses notable circuit court opinions addressing issues of ongoing relevance."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2012-12-11
-
Congressional Authority to Limit Military Operations [September 8, 2011]
"Controversy continues over the appropriate role that Congress should play in regulating U.S. military operations against foreign entities. U.S. action against Libya reignited consideration of long-standing questions concerning the President's constitutional authority to use military force without congressional authorization, as well as congressional authority to regulate or limit the use of such force. As Congress considers defense authorization and appropriations bills for FY2012, there may be a renewed focus on whether or to what extent Congress has the constitutional authority to legislate limits on the President's authority to conduct military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, or other locations. […] The report discusses Congress's ability to limit funding for U.S. participation in hostilities, examining relevant court cases and prior measures taken by Congress to restrict military operations, as well as possible alternative avenues to fund these activities in the event that appropriations are cut. The report then provides historical examples of measures that restrict the use of particular personnel, and concludes with a brief analysis of arguments that might be brought to bear on the question of Congress's authority to limit the availability of troops to serve in ongoing military operations. Although not beyond debate, such limitations appear to be within Congress's authority to allocate resources for military operations. Portions of this report are taken from an earlier report, CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL33837, 'Congressional Authority to Limit U.S. Military Operations in Iraq', by Jennifer K. Elsea, Michael John Garcia, and Thomas J. Nicola."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John; Nicola, Thomas J.
2011-09-08
-
Congressional Authority to Limit U.S. Military Operations in Iraq [Updated April 24, 2007]
"This report begins by providing background and discusses constitutional provisions allocating war powers between Congress and the President, and presents a historical overview of relevant court cases. Next, it discusses Congress's power to rescind prior military authorization and the consequences of such a repeal. Evaluating relevant jurisprudence and the pertinent provisions of the War Powers Resolution, it concludes that the repeal of the AUMF, absent the further denial of appropriations or the establishment of a specific deadline for troop withdrawal, would likely have little, if any, legal effect on the continuation of combat operations. Finally, the report discusses Congress's ability to limit funding for military operations in Iraq. It examines relevant court cases and prior measures taken by Congress to restrict military operations, as well as possible alternative avenues to fund operations in the event Congress were to restrict appropriations for the war. There follows a summary of measures passed by both Houses in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 2007, H.R. 1591, related to the redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq. The report concludes by providing a brief analysis of arguments that might be brought to bear on the question of Congress's authority to limit the availability of troops to serve in Iraq. Although not beyond debate, such a restriction appears to be within Congress's authority to allocate resources for military operations."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John; Nicola, Thomas J.
2007-04-24
-
Guantanamo Detention Center: Legislative Activity in the 111th Congress [December 9, 2010]
"To date in the 111th Congress, provisions directly relating to Guantanamo detainees have been enacted as part of eight laws: the 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-32); the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-83); the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 111-84); the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-88); the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117); the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-118); the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-212) and the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY2010 (P.L. 111-259). Most of these measures impose general restrictions on the use or availability of funds to transfer or release Guantanamo detainees into the United States, though they also provide an exception permitting transfers for purposes of criminal prosecution or detention during legal proceedings if certain reporting requirements are fulfilled. Although the 2010 fiscal year has ended, Congress has passed continuing resolutions that extended funding for federal agencies at the FY2010 enacted spending levels first through December 3, 2010 (P.L. 111- 242), and then through December 18, 2010 (P.L. 111-290). The Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (H.R. 3082), which was agreed to by the House on December 8, 2010, would prohibit any funds made available under it or any prior act from being used to transfer or release a Guantanamo detainee into the United States, its territories, or possessions. It would also bar funds provided to the Department of Justice from being used to acquire any facility for use in detaining any person who was held at Guantanamo as of June 24, 2009. The FY2011 defense authorization measures--S. 3454 and the House-passed H.R. 5136--would also extend or expand restrictions on detainee transfers. The House-passed Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2011 (H.R. 5822), would bar the funds it appropriates or makes available from being used to renovate or construct a facility within the continental United States to house Guantanamo detainees. [...] This report analyzes relevant provisions in enacted legislation and selected pending bills."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John
2010-12-09
-
Closing the Guantanamo Detention Center: Legal Issues [February 11, 2011]
"The closure of the Guantanamo detention facility raises a number of legal issues with respect to the individuals formerly interned there, particularly if those detainees are transferred to the United States. The nature and scope of constitutional protections owed to detainees within the United States may be different from the protections owed to aliens held abroad. The transfer of detainees to the United States may also have immigration consequences. This report provides an overview of major legal issues likely to arise as a result of executive and legislative action to close the Guantanamo detention facility. It discusses legal issues related to the transfer of Guantanamo detainees (either to a foreign country or into the United States), the continued detention of such persons in the United States, and the possible removal of persons brought into the country. It also discusses selected constitutional issues that may arise in the criminal prosecution of detainees, emphasizing the procedural and substantive protections that are utilized in different adjudicatory forums (i.e., federal civilian courts, court-martial proceedings, and military commissions)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John; Mason, R. Chuck
2011-02-11
-
Ebola: Selected Legal Issues [December 16, 2014]
"Several West African countries are currently grappling with an unprecedented outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD). Here in the United States, where Ebola is not endemic, a handful of EVD cases have been diagnosed, and domestic transmission of the virus has occurred in only two cases to date. This report provides a brief overview of selected legal issues regarding measures to prevent transmission of Ebola virus and the civil rights of individuals affected by the disease. Quarantine and isolation are restrictions on a person's movement, imposed to prevent the spread of contagious disease. The federal government has jurisdiction over interstate and border quarantine, carried out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). However, primary quarantine authority typically resides with state health departments and health officials. Every state has the authority to pass and enforce quarantine laws as an exercise of its police powers, but these laws may vary widely by state. State and federal quarantine or isolation orders may be subject to suits alleging inadequate due process or violations of equal protection, but modern legal challenges to quarantine and isolation orders are not extensive. […] The use of these measures to contain the spread of Ebola may raise a classic civil rights issue: to what extent can an individual's liberty be curtailed to advance the common good? In addition to the constitutional issues noted above, discrimination against individuals with an infectious disease may be covered by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), or the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA). While quarantine and isolation effectively minimize Ebola exposure, they may also raise various employment concerns, particularly for those workers who fear losing their jobs or wages if they are forced to comply with a quarantine or isolation order. Infected workers may also be protected under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) if it can be established that they have a serious health condition, and employers whose employees could face workplace exposure to Ebola virus may be obligated to comply with applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cole, Jared P.; Perry, Rodney M.; Dolan, Alissa M. . . .
2014-12-16
-
Wartime Detention Provisions in Recent Defense Authorization Legislation [January 23, 2015]
"In recent years, Congress has included provisions in annual defense authorization bills addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and, more broadly, the disposition of persons captured in the course of hostilities against Al Qaeda and associated forces. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 (2012 NDAA; P.L. 112-81) arguably constituted the most significant legislation informing wartime detention policy since the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF; P.L. 107-40), which serves as the primary legal authority for U.S. operations against Al Qaeda and associated forces. Much of the debate surrounding passage of the 2012 NDAA centered on what appeared to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the AUMF in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. But the 2012 NDAA addressed other issues as well, including the continued detention of persons at Guantanamo. Both the 2013 NDAA (P.L. 112-239) and the 2014 NDAA (P.L. 113-66) also contain subtitles addressing U.S. detention policy, though neither act addresses detention matters as comprehensively as did the 2012 NDAA. […] This report offers a brief background of the salient issues raised by the detainee provisions of the FY2012 NDAA, provides a section-by-section analysis, and discusses executive interpretation and implementation of the act's mandatory military detention provision. It also addresses detainee provisions in the 2013 NDAA and 2014 NDAA, as well as those considered during the House and Senate deliberations of the 2015 NDAA. An earlier version of this report was entitled The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 and Beyond: Detainee Matters."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2015-01-23
-
Obama Administration's Proposed AUMF against the Islamic State: Some Immediate Takeaways [February 19, 2015]
In the context of this document, AUMF refers to authorization for the use of military force. "For several months, the United States has been engaged in offensive airstrikes against the Islamic State (sometimes referred to as ISIS [Islamic State in Iraq and Syria] or ISIL [Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant]) in Iraq and Syria. On February 11, 2015, President Obama submitted draft legislation to Congress that would authorize military force against the Islamic State for three years, and repeal one of the existing legal authorities that has been cited by the Administration in support of current U.S. operations. The draft legislation has been the subject of differing opinions among Members of Congress, particularly regarding the scope and effect of the proposed authorization for the use of military force (AUMF), and its relationship with existing legal authorities cited by the Administration in support of current operations against the Islamic State. This post provides a brief overview of the Administration's legal justification for current operations, briefly describes the draft AUMF, and addresses some of the most frequently asked questions regarding the proposed legislation's legal effect."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John
2015-02-19
-
Iran: Interim Nuclear Agreement and Talks on a Comprehensive Accord [March 9, 2015]
"On November 24, 2013, Iran and the six powers that have negotiated with Iran about its nuclear program since 2006 (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany--collectively known as the 'P5+1') finalized an interim agreement ('Joint Plan of Action,' JPA) requiring Iran to freeze many aspects of its nuclear program in exchange for relief from some international sanctions. The period of the interim deal was to be six months, during which time Iran and the P5+1 would attempt to reach a comprehensive deal on the long-term status of Iran's nuclear program. The main elements of the JPA are requirements that Iran freeze, in effect, its production of enriched uranium hexafluoride containing 20% uranium-235--the form of enriched uranium in Iran's stockpile that has caused the most concern; dilute and convert the 20% enriched uranium and 5% enriched uranium stocks to other forms that would take time to reverse; halt key elements of its heavy-water reactor program that could lead to a plutonium bomb; and provide the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with additional information about its nuclear program, as well as access to some nuclear-related facilities which are not covered by Iran's IAEA safeguards agreement. The JPA has been seen as slowing Iran's build-up of nuclear material and improving the international community's ability to identify Iranian efforts to develop nuclear weapons."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Katzman, Kenneth . . .
2015-03-09
-
Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 114th Congress [February 3, 2016]
From the Summary: "The House and the Senate have considered immigration measures on a variety of issues in the 114th Congress. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (P.L. 114-113) extends four immigration programs through September 30, 2016: the EB-5 immigrant investor Regional Center Pilot Program, the E-Verify employment eligibility verification system, the Conrad State program for foreign medical graduates, and the special immigrant religious worker program. P.L. 114-113 also contains provisions on the Visa Waiver Program and certain nonimmigrant visa categories. Other enacted immigration-related measures include the Border Jobs for Veterans Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-68) on border security personnel, the Adoptive Family Relief Act (P.L. 114-70) on intercountry adoption, and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (P.L. 114-92) on the Afghan special immigrant visa program. The House has passed several other immigration-related bills. Among them are the Northern Border Security Review Act (H.R. 455), the Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015 (H.R. 998), the Border Security Technology Accountability Act of 2015 (H.R. 1634), the Enforce the Law for Sanctuary Cities Act (H.R. 3009), and the American SAFE Act of 2015 (H.R. 4038). H.R. 998 has also been reported by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. […] This report discusses these and other immigration-related issues that have received legislative action or are of significant congressional interest in the 114th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bruno, Andorra; Bjelopera, Jerome P.; Garcia, Michael John . . .
2016-02-03
-
Unaccompanied Alien Children - Legal Issues: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions [January 27, 2016]
From the Summary: "The beginning of FY2016 has seen an uptick in the number of alien minors apprehended at the U.S. border without a parent or legal guardian in comparison to the same time period in the prior year. This increase has prompted renewed questions regarding so-called unaccompanied alien children (UACs), many of which were previously raised in FY2013-FY2014, when a significant number of UACs were apprehended along the southern U.S. border. Some of these questions pertain to the numbers of children involved, their reasons for coming to the United States, and current and potential responses of the federal government and other entities to their arrival. Other questions concern the interpretation and interplay of various federal statutes and regulations, administrative and judicial decisions, and settlement agreements pertaining to alien minors. This report addresses the latter questions, providing general and relatively brief answers to 15 frequently asked questions regarding UACs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manuel, Kate; Garcia, Michael John
2016-01-27
-
Iran: Interim Nuclear Agreement and Talks on a Comprehensive Accord [March 27, 2015]
"On November 24, 2013, Iran and the six powers that have negotiated with Iran about its nuclear program since 2006 (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany--collectively known as the 'P5+[plus]1') finalized an interim agreement ('Joint Plan of Action,' JPA) requiring Iran to freeze many aspects of its nuclear program in exchange for relief from some international sanctions. The period of the interim deal was to be six months, during which time Iran and the P5+1 would attempt to reach a comprehensive deal on the long-term status of Iran's nuclear program. The main elements of the JPA are requirements that Iran freeze, in effect, its production of enriched uranium hexafluoride containing 20% uranium-235--the form of enriched uranium in Iran's stockpile that has caused the most concern; dilute and convert the 20% enriched uranium and 5% enriched uranium stocks to other forms that would take time to reverse; halt key elements of its heavy-water reactor program that could lead to a plutonium bomb; and provide the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with additional information about its nuclear program, as well as access to some nuclear-related facilities which are not covered by Iran's IAEA safeguards agreement. The JPA has been seen as slowing Iran's build-up of nuclear material and improving the international community's ability to identify Iranian efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has complied with its JPA obligations, according to the IAEA."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth; Kerr, Paul K.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham . . .
2015-03-27
-
Wartime Detention Provisions in Recent Defense Authorization Legislation [May 28, 2015]
"In recent years, Congress has included provisions in annual defense authorization bills addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and, more broadly, the disposition of persons captured in the course of hostilities against Al Qaeda and associated forces. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 (2012 NDAA; P.L. 112-81) arguably constituted the most significant legislation informing wartime detention policy since the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF; P.L. 107-40), which serves as the primary legal authority for U.S. operations against Al Qaeda and associated forces. Much of the debate surrounding passage of the 2012 NDAA centered on what appeared to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the AUMF in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. But the 2012 NDAA addressed other issues as well, including the continued detention of persons at Guantanamo. Both the 2013 NDAA (P.L. 112-239) and the 2014 NDAA (P.L. 113-66) also contain subtitles addressing U.S. detention policy, though neither act addresses detention matters as comprehensively as did the 2012 NDAA. The 2015 NDAA (P.L. 113-291) and the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (2015 Cromnibus; P.L. 113-235), essentially maintain the status quo."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2015-05-28
-
Wartime Detention Provisions in Recent Defense Authorization Legislation [March 14, 2016]
"In recent years, Congress has included provisions in annual defense authorization bills addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and, more broadly, the disposition of persons captured in the course of hostilities against Al Qaeda and associated forces. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 (2012 NDAA; P.L. 112-81) arguably constituted the most significant legislation informing wartime detention policy since the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF; P.L. 107-40), which serves as the primary legal authority for U.S. operations against Al Qaeda and associated forces. Much of the debate surrounding passage of the 2012 NDAA centered on what appeared to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the AUMF in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. But the 2012 NDAA addressed other issues as well, including the continued detention of persons at Guantanamo. [...] This report offers a brief background of the salient issues raised by the detainee provisions of the FY2012 NDAA, provides a section-by-section analysis, and discusses executive interpretation and implementation of the act's mandatory military detention provision. It also addresses detainee provisions in subsequent defense authorization legislation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2016-03-14
-
Immigration Consequences of Criminal Activity [Updated December 12, 2006]
"Congress has broad plenary authority to determine classes of aliens who may be admitted into the United States and the grounds for which they may be removed. Pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, certain conduct may either disqualify an alien from entering the United States ('inadmissibility') or provide grounds for his or her removal/deportation. Prominently included among this conduct is criminal activity. 'Criminal activity' comprises acts violative of federal, state, or, in many cases, foreign criminal law. It does not cover violations of the INA that are not crimes, most notably, being in the U.S. without legal permission. Thus, the term 'illegal alien' - an alien without legal status - is not synonymous with 'criminal alien.' Most crimes affecting immigration status are not specifically mentioned by the INA, but instead fall under a broad category of crimes, such as 'crimes involving moral turpitude or aggravated felonies'. In addition, certain criminal conduct precludes a finding of 'good moral character' under the INA, which is a requirement for naturalization and certain types of immigration relief."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John
2006-12-12
-
International Law and Agreements: Their Effect Upon U.S. Law [March 1, 2013]
"This report provides an introduction to the roles that international law and agreements play in the United States. International law is derived from two primary sources-international agreements and customary practice. Under the U.S. legal system, international agreements can be entered into by means of a treaty or an executive agreement. The Constitution allocates primary responsibility for entering into such agreements to the executive branch, but Congress also plays an essential role. First, in order for a treaty (but not an executive agreement) to become binding upon the United States, the Senate must provide its advice and consent to treaty ratification by a two-thirds majority. Secondly, Congress may authorize congressional-executive agreements. Thirdly, many treaties and executive agreements are not self-executing, meaning that implementing legislation is required to provide U.S. bodies with the domestic legal authority necessary to enforce and comply with an international agreement's provisions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John
2013-03-01
-
Closing the Guantanamo Detention Center: Legal Issues [May 30, 2013]
"Following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Congress passed the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), which granted the President the authority 'to use all necessary and appropriate force against those ... [who] planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks' against the United States. Many persons subsequently captured during military operations in Afghanistan and elsewhere were transferred to the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for detention and possible prosecution. Although nearly 800 persons have been held at Guantanamo since early 2002, the substantial majority of Guantanamo detainees have been transferred to another country for continued detention or release. […] This report provides an overview of major legal issues likely to arise as a result of executive and legislative action to close the Guantanamo detention facility. It discusses legal issues related to the transfer of Guantanamo detainees (either to a foreign country or into the United States), the continued detention of such persons in the United States, and the possible removal of persons brought into the country. It also discusses selected constitutional issues that may arise in the criminal prosecution of detainees, emphasizing the procedural and substantive protections that are utilized in different forums (i.e., federal courts, court-martial proceedings, and military commissions)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Garcia, Michael John; Elsea, Jennifer; Mason, R. Chuck . . .
2013-05-30
-
Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 110th Congress [Updated September 4, 2008]
"Comprehensive immigration reform was the subject of much discussion at the start of the 110th Congress. In the 109th Congress, both the House and the Senate passed major immigration bills, but they were never reconciled. During the first session of the 110th Congress, a bipartisan group of Senators developed broad immigration reform legislation with the active involvement of the Bush Administration. Aimed at addressing a host of perceived problems with the U.S. immigration system, this legislation combined border security and interior enforcement provisions with provisions on temporary workers, permanent admissions, and unauthorized aliens. The Senate considered several immigration reform measures (S. 1348, S.Amdt.1150 to S. 1348, S. 1639) in May and June of 2007. On June 28, 2007, the Senate voted on a motion to invoke cloture on S. 1639, which, if approved, would have ultimately brought the bill to a vote. The cloture motion failed, however, on a vote of 46 to 53, and the Senate Majority Leader pulled the bill from the Senate floor. [...] This report discusses immigration-related issues that have seen legislative action or are of significant congressional interest."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kim, Yule; Lee, Margaret Mikyung; Garcia, Michael John . . .
2008-09-04
-
Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 110th Congress [Updated May 9, 2008]
"Comprehensive immigration reform was the subject of much discussion at the start of the 110th Congress. In the 109th Congress, both the House and the Senate passed major immigration bills, but they were never reconciled. During the first session of the 110th Congress, a bipartisan group of Senators developed broad immigration reform legislation with the active involvement of the Bush Administration. Aimed at addressing a host of perceived problems with the U.S. immigration system, this legislation combined border security and interior enforcement provisions with provisions on temporary workers, permanent admissions, and unauthorized aliens. The Senate considered several immigration reform measures (S. 1348, S.Amdt.1150 to S. 1348, S. 1639) in May and June of 2007. On June 28, 2007, the Senate voted on a motion to invoke cloture on S. 1639, which, if approved, would have ultimately brought the bill to a vote. The cloture motion failed, however, on a vote of 46 to 53, and the Senate Majority Leader pulled the bill from the Senate floor. [...] This report discusses immigration-related issues that have seen legislative action or are of significant congressional interest."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Haddal, Chad C.; Nunez-Neto, Blas; Wasem, Ruth Ellen . . .
2008-05-09
