Noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Kashmir: Background, Recent Developments, and U.S. Policy, August 16, 2019

Global Trends in HIV/AIDS, CRS In Focus, updated August 15, 2019

Retroactive Legislation: A Primer for Congress, CRS In Focus, August 15, 2019

Words Taken Down: Calling Members to Order for Disorderly Language in the House, August 13, 2019

International Discussions Concerning Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, CRS In Focus, August 16, 2019

The problem of domestic terrorism is distinct from that of foreign terrorism because of the constitutional protections enjoyed by U.S. persons, the Congressional Research Service explained last week.

“Constitutional principles — including federalism and the rights to free speech, free association, peaceable assembly, petition for the redress of grievances — may complicate the task of conferring domestic law enforcement with the tools of foreign intelligence gathering.” See Domestic Terrorism: Some Considerations, CRS Legal Sidebar, August 12, 2019.

Some other noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Convergence of Cyberspace Operations and Electronic Warfare, CRS In Focus, August 13, 2019

Renewed Great Power Competition: Implications for Defense–Issues for Congress, updated August 5, 2019

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel, updated August 7, 2019

U.S.-North Korea Relations, CRS In Focus, updated August 13, 2019 (which notes that “Pyongyang appears to be losing its ability to control information inflows from the outside world.”)

Russia’s Nuclear Weapons: Doctrine, Forces, and Modernization, August 5, 2019

Over the coming year, high school students around the country will debate whether the U.S. should reduce its arms sales to foreign countries.

Specifically, the national debate topic that was selected for the 2019-20 school year is: Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially reduce Direct Commercial Sales and/or Foreign Military Sales of arms from the United States.

As required by statute, the Congressional Research Service prepared a bibliography reflecting diverse points of view on U.S. arms sales to help inform student debaters on this topic.

“This selective bibliography, with brief annotations, is intended to assist debaters in identifying resources and references on the national debate topic,” the CRS document says. “It lists citations to journal articles, books, congressional publications, legal cases, and websites. The bibliography is divided into three broad sections: basic concepts and definitions, general overviews, and specific cases.”

The runner-up topic for this year’s national high school debate was: Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially change its nuclear weapons strategy.

* * *

Other noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

The Department of Defense’s JEDI Cloud Program, updated August 2, 2019

Department of Defense Energy Management: Background and Issues for Congress, July 25, 2019

U.S.-Iran Tensions and Implications for U.S. Policy, updated July 29, 2019

3D Printing: Overview, Impacts, and the Federal Role, August 2, 2019

Resolutions to Censure the President: Procedure and History, updated August 1, 2019

There are only nineteen years since 1798 when the U.S. did not have armed forces engaged in military operations abroad, according to an updated tally from the Congressional Research Service. See Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2019, updated July 17, 2019.

The most recent year in which U.S. military forces were not used in a foreign conflict was 1979, according to the CRS. The CRS account does not reflect covert action, disaster relief, or training activities involving U.S. forces abroad.

Though there have only been 11 formal declarations of war, there have been hundreds of military actions including “extended military engagements that might be considered undeclared wars.”

“These cases vary greatly in size of operation, legal authorization, and significance,” CRS said. “Some actions were of short duration, and some lasted a number of years. In some examples, a military officer acted without authorization; some actions were conducted solely under the President’s powers as Chief Executive or Commander in Chief; other instances were authorized by Congress in some fashion.”

*    *    *

Other noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Critical Infrastructure: Emerging Trends and Policy Considerations for Congress, July 8, 2019

DOD’s Cloud Strategy and the JEDI Cloud Procurement, CRS In Focus, updated July 16, 2019

U.S. Strategy for Engagement in Central America: An Overview, CRS In Focus, updated July 17, 2019

Immigration: Alternatives to Detention (ATD) Programs, July 8, 2019

Beneficial Ownership Transparency in Corporate Formation, Shell Companies, Real Estate, and Financial Transactions, July 8, 2019

Hypersonic Weapons: Background and Issues for Congress, July 11, 2019

Noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

The Impeachment Process in the House of Representatives, June 14, 2019

National Security Implications of Fifth Generation (5G) Mobile Technologies, CRS In Focus, June 12, 2019

U.S. Overseas Diplomatic Presence: Background and Issues for Congress, June 6, 2019

Maintaining Electric Reliability with Wind and Solar Sources: Background and Issues for Congress, June 10, 2019

Central American Migration: Root Causes and U.S. Policy, CRS In Focus, updated June 13, 2019

Extradition of U.S. Citizens, CRS Legal Sidebar, June 13, 2019

Regulating Big Tech: Legal Implications, CRS Legal Sidebar, June 11, 2019

Frequently Asked Questions about the Julian Assange Charges, CRS Legal Sidebar, updated June 7, 2019

Emergency Arms Sales to the Middle East: Context and Legislative History, CRS Memorandum, June 7, 2019

Noteworthy new reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

FY2020 National Security Space Budget Request: An Overview, CRS In Focus, June 7, 2019

U.S. Military Electronic Warfare Program Funding: Background and Issues for Congress, June 6, 2019

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and Tariffs: Historical Background and Key Issues, CRS Insight, June 5, 2019

Iran and Israel: Tension Over Syria, CRS In Focus, updated June 5, 2019

North Korea: Legislative Basis for U.S. Economic Sanctions, updated June 6, 2019

Human Rights in China, CRS In Focus, June 4, 2019

Transatlantic Relations: U.S. Interests and Key Issues, May 31, 2019

Enforcing Federal Privacy Law–Constitutional Limitations on Private Rights of Action, CRS Legal Sidebar, May 31, 2019

Technological Convergence: Regulatory, Digital Privacy, and Data Security Issues, May 30, 2019

Navy Large Unmanned Surface and Undersea Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress, June 7, 2019

War Legacy Issues in Southeast Asia: Unexploded Ordnance (UXO), June 3, 2019

The Front End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Current Issues, June 6, 2019

At the request of the Department of Homeland Security, the Army Corps of Engineers has undertaken numerous barrier construction projects along the border with Mexico in California, Arizona and New Mexico.

The latest projects were itemized by the Congressional Research Service in Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Southern Border Barriers, CRS In Focus, May 22, 2019.

Some other noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Defense Primer: Acquiring Specialty Metals, Rare Earth Magnets, and Tungsten, CRS In Focus, May 24, 2019

The Economic Effects of the 2017 Tax Revision: Preliminary Observations, May 22, 2019

Legislative Purpose and Adviser Immunity in Congressional Investigations, CRS Legal Sidebar, May 24, 2019

An Overview of State and Federal Authority to Impose Vaccination Requirements, CRS Legal Sidebar, May 22, 2019

“Since 2006 — five years after the start of major combat operations in Afghanistan and three years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq — a total of 16,652 active duty personnel and mobilized reservists have died while serving in the U.S. armed forces,” the Congressional Research Service said, based on data obtained from the Department of Defense. See Recent Trends in Active-Duty Military Deaths, CRS In Focus, updated May 20, 2019.

Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Military Personnel and Extremism: Law, Policy, and Considerations for Congress, CRS Insight, updated May 16, 2019

United States Foreign Intelligence Relationships: Background, Policy and Legal Authorities, Risks, Benefits, May 15, 2019

Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, CRS In Focus, updated May 20, 2019

Combating Corruption in Latin America: Congressional Considerations, May 21, 2019

Cuba: Trump Administration Expands Sanctions, CRS Insight, May 17, 2019

The European Parliament and U.S. Interests, CRS In Focus, May 16, 2019

Long Live Cash: The Potential Decline of Cash Usage and Related Implications, May 10, 2019

Electronic Messaging Recordkeeping Requirements, CRS In Focus, May 21, 2019

Noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Nuclear Waste Storage Sites in the United States, CRS In Focus, May 3, 2019

Proposed Civilian Personnel System Supporting “Space Force”, CRS In Focus, May 7, 2019

Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC): Background and Issues for Congress, April 25, 2019

Congressional Access to the President’s Federal Tax Returns, CRS Legal Sidebar, updated May 7, 2019

“Sanctuary” Jurisdictions: Federal, State, and Local Policies and Related Litigation, updated May 3, 2019

Terrorism, Violent Extremism, and the Internet: Free Speech Considerations, May 6, 2019

Noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Defense Primer: Electronic Warfare, CRS In Focus, updated April 12, 2019

U.S. Military Electronic Warfare Research and Development: Recent Funding Projections, CRS Insight, April 15, 2019

Assessing Commercial Disclosure Requirements under the First Amendment, April 23, 2019

The National Institutes of Health (NIH): Background and Congressional Issues, updated April 19, 2019

The Federal Communications Commission: Current Structure and Its Role in the Changing Telecommunications Landscape, April 18, 2019

Selected Homeland Security Issues in the 116th Congress, April 23, 2019

Can the President Close the Border? Relevant Laws and Considerations, CRS Legal Sidebar, April 12, 2019

Central American Migration: Root Causes and U.S. Policy, CRS In Focus, March 27, 2019

Cooperative Security in the Middle East: History and Prospects, CRS In Focus, updated April 11, 2019

International Criminal Court: U.S. Response to Examination of Atrocity Crimes in Afghanistan, CRS Insight, updated April 16, 2019

Nuclear Cooperation: Part 810 Authorizations, CRS In Focus, April 18, 2019

U.S. War Costs, Casualties, and Personnel Levels Since 9/11, CRS In Focus, April 18, 2019

The House Judiciary Committee said that it will meet this week to authorize a subpoena for release (to Congress) of the complete Mueller report, without redactions, as well as the supporting evidence gathered by the now-concluded Special Counsel investigation.

If a subpoena is issued, what happens then?

“When Congress finds an inquiry blocked by the withholding of information by the executive branch, or where the traditional process of negotiation and accommodation is inappropriate or unavailing, a subpoena — either for testimony or documents — may be used to compel compliance with congressional demands,” a new report from the Congressional Research Service explains. “The recipient of a duly issued and valid congressional subpoena has a legal obligation to comply, absent a valid and overriding privilege or other legal justification.”

However, “the subpoena is only as effective as the means by which it may be enforced. Without a process by which Congress can coerce compliance or deter non-compliance, the subpoena would be reduced to a formalized request rather than a constitutionally based demand for information.”

Today, Congress has a limited set of tools at its disposal to enforce subpoenas.

“Congress currently employs an ad hoc combination of methods to combat non-compliance with subpoenas,” including criminal contempt citations and civil enforcement. “But these mechanisms do not always ensure congressional access to requested information,” CRS said.

To compel executive branch compliance with a subpoena, additional steps may be necessary.

“There would appear to be several ways in which Congress could alter its approach to enforcing committee subpoenas issued to executive branch officials,” the new CRS report said.

“These alternatives include the enactment of laws that would expedite judicial consideration of subpoena-enforcement lawsuits filed by either house of Congress; the establishment of an independent office charged with enforcing the criminal contempt of Congress statute; or the creation of an automatic consequence, such as a withholding of appropriated funds, triggered by the approval of a contempt citation. In addition, either the House or Senate could consider acting on internal rules of procedure to revive the long-dormant inherent contempt power as a way to enforce subpoenas issued to executive branch officials.”

In any case, “Congress’s ability to issue and enforce its own subpoenas is essential to the legislative function and an ‘indispensable ingredient of lawmaking’,” CRS said (quoting a 1975 US Supreme Court opinion). See Congressional Subpoenas: Enforcing Executive Branch Compliance, March 27, 2019.

*    *    *

Other noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Congressional Participation in Litigation: Article III and Legislative Standing, updated March 28, 2019

Assessing NATO’s Value, updated March 28, 2019

FY2020 Defense Budget Request: An Overview, CRS Insight, updated March 26, 2019

Defense Primer: Military Use of the Electromagnetic Spectrum, CRS In Focus, March 27, 2019

Defense Primer: U.S. Policy on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, CRS In Focus, March 27, 2019

Iraq: Issues in the 116th Congress, March 26, 2019

Free Speech and the Regulation of Social Media Content, March 27, 2019

Yesterday, the Department of Justice announced that an Australian man had been sentenced to 24 months in prison for illegally exporting aircraft parts and other items to Iran without a license, in violation of a law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The case relied on a 1979 declaration of national emergency that remains in force.

The IEEPA, which gives the President the power to regulate certain economic transactions, can only be used under conditions of a national emergency. But it is the most frequently used of all of the reported 123 emergency statutes that have been adopted under the National Emergencies Act.

A major new report from the Congressional Research Service documents the history and application of the IEEPA as a tool of presidential emergency power. See The International Emergency Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use, March 20, 2019.

The “emergency” that made it possible to apply the IEEPA against the Austrailian exporter who was sentenced yesterday is the first, the oldest and the longest emergency ever declared under the National Emergencies Act. It was pronounced by President Carter in response to the seizure of the U.S. embassy by Iran in 1979.

“Six successive Presidents have renewed that emergency annually for nearly forty years,” CRS noted, and it “may soon enter its fifth decade… As of March 1, 2019, that emergency is still in effect, largely to provide a legal basis for resolving matters of ownership of the Shah’s disputed assets.”

In ordinary language, a condition that persists for decades cannot properly be termed an “emergency.”

Such “permanent emergencies are unacceptable,” wrote Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice in a March 17 Wall Street Journal op-ed. “Once approved by Congress, states of emergency should expire after six months unless Congress votes to renew them,” she suggested, “and no emergency should exceed five years. Conditions lasting that long are not unforeseen or temporary, which are basic elements of an emergency.”

*    *    *

Some other noteworthy new publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Evaluating DOD Strategy: Key Findings of the National Defense Strategy Commission, CRS In Focus, March 19, 2019

International Trophy Hunting, March 20, 2019

U.S. Global Health Assistance: FY2017-FY2020 Request, CRS In Focus, updated March 14, 2019

U.S. Health Care Coverage and Spending, CRS In Focus, updated March 21, 2019

Federal Disaster Assistance for Agriculture, CRS In Focus, updated March 19, 2019

Europe’s Refugee and Migration Flows, CRS In Focus, updated March 20, 2019

U.S. Intelligence Community (IC): Appointment Dates and Appointment Legal Provisions for Selected IC Leadership, CRS In Focus, updated March 19, 2019

Proposed Air Force Acquisition of New F-15EXs, CRS Insight, March 19, 2019

Judicial Nomination Statistics and Analysis: U.S. District and Circuit Courts, 1977-2018, March 21, 2019

A Low-Yield, Submarine-Launched Nuclear Warhead: Overview of the Expert Debate, CRS In Focus, March 21, 2019