Undisclosed U.S. Detention Sites Overseas and More from CRS
The use of secret U.S. prison facilities abroad, first reported by Dana Priest in the Washington Post in November 2005, has since been confirmed by President Bush and has become the focus of controversy in the U.S. and elsewhere.
A new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service synthesizes what is now publicly known about the secret prisons and discusses some of the relevant legal concerns they raise. (“It is based on available open-source documentation, as cited, and not on any independent CRS investigation.”)
A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News.
See “Undisclosed U.S. Detention Sites Overseas: Background and Legal Issues,” September 12, 2006.
Some miscellaneous other new products from CRS include the following (all pdf).
“Israeli-Arab Negotiations: Background, Conflicts, and U.S. Policy,” updated September 1, 2006.
“Israel: Background and Relations with the United States,” updated August 31, 2006.
“Saudi Arabia: Current Issues and U.S. Relations,” August 2, 2006.
“Sri Lanka: Background and U.S. Relations,” updated August 1, 2006.
“Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches — Background and Options for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy Attack Submarine Force-Level Goal and Procurement Rate: Background and Issues for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy Ship Propulsion Technologies: Options for Reducing Oil Use — Background for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy-Marine Corps Amphibious and Maritime Prepositioning Ship Programs: Background and Oversight Issues for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Unmanned Vehicles for U.S. Naval Forces: Background and Issues for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
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.