Can States Uphold Paris Accord?, & More from CRS
Some American cities and states are committing to pursue the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change despite President Trump’s repudiation of that policy.
But a new brief from the Congressional Research Service said the US Constitution may limit the ability of states to formally adopt such a course. In particular, the Constitution appears to bar states from making legally binding agreements with foreign nations. And the Supreme Court has often stated that the federal government preempts states in matters of foreign affairs.
See Constitutional Limits on States’ Efforts to “Uphold” the Paris Agreement, CRS Legal Sidebar, June 27, 2017.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
Climate Change: Frequently Asked Questions about the 2015 Paris Agreement, updated June 28, 2017
Help Wanted: Supreme Court Holds Vacancies Act Prohibits Nominees from Serving as Acting Officers, CRS Legal Sidebar, June 28, 2017
Comparison of the American Health Care Act (AHCA) and the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA), July 3, 2017
Foreign Direct Investment in the United States: An Economic Analysis, updated June 29, 2017
U.S. Direct Investment Abroad: Trends and Current Issues, updated June 29, 2017
The Federal Budget: Overview and Issues for FY2018 and Beyond, June 30, 2017
No Bivens for You?, CRS Legal Sidebar, July 5, 2017
Qatar: Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, updated June 29, 2017
The United Arab Emirates (UAE): Issues for U.S. Policy, updated June 28, 2017
The Coast Guard’s Role in Safeguarding Maritime Transportation: Selected Issues, updated June 28, 2017
The Legal and Practical Effects of Private Immigration Legislation and Recent Policy Changes, CRS Legal Sidebar, June 30, 2017
Americans are paying too much for almost everything, because the United States has long treated its trucking industry as an artifact to be preserved rather than as an opportunity for innovation.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.