The U.S. Constitution does not mention immigration. But the Supreme Court has held that Congress has essentially complete (“plenary”) power to regulate immigration and that the executive branch has broad authority to enforce laws concerning alien entry to the US. In fact, as a new report from the Congressional Research Service explains, Congress can make laws concerning aliens that would be unconstitutional if applied to citizens.
Against this background, the Court’s temporary restriction of the Trump Administration’s power to exclude nonresident aliens abroad is “remarkable when compared with the Court’s earlier [consistently permissive] immigration jurisprudence,” CRS said.
The legal landscape upon which current immigration controversies are unfolding was described last week in Overview of the Federal Government’s Power to Exclude Aliens, September 27, 2017.
Other new or updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
Privatization and the Constitution: Selected Legal Issues, September 25, 2017
Congress’s Power Over Courts: Jurisdiction Stripping and the Rule of Klein, September 26, 2017
Corporate Tax Reform: Issues for Congress, updated September 22, 2017
Potential Impacts of Uncertainty Regarding Affordable Care Act (ACA) Cost-Sharing Reduction Payments, CRS Insight, September 25, 2017
Federal Financing for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), updated September 29, 2017
Hurricanes Irma and Maria: Impact on Caribbean Countries and Foreign Territories, CRS Insight, September 28, 2017
National Flood Insurance Program Borrowing Authority, CRS Insight, September 22, 2017
The National Health Service Corps, September 27, 2017
Amtrak: Overview, September 28, 2017
Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) Mobility, Reconnaissance, and Firepower Programs, September 26, 2017
Navy Frigate (FFG[X]) Program: Background and Issues for Congress, September 28, 2017
Recent Developments in U.S. Aid to Egypt, CRS Insight, September 29, 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.