CRS Reports – Week of 10-26-24 – Supreme Court Jurisdiction

This week the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a report on: “The Exceptions Clause and Congressional Control over Supreme Court Jurisdiction”. The report looks at the constitutional differences between the different types of cases that the Supreme Court may here. It describes the cases over which the Court has ‘original jurisdiction’, cases that are brought directly to the Court dealing with Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party. All other cases reach the Court on appeal of judgements of the lessor courts. It takes special pains to discuss the fact that the Constitution limits those appeals under the ‘Exceptions Clause’ (Article III, Section 2, Clause 2) by making those appeals subject to ““such Exceptions, and … Regulations as the Congress shall make”.

The ‘Considerations for Congress’ section of the report is much more detailed than typically seen in these CRS reports. Instead of laying out specific actions that Congress could/should consider in respect to this topic, the Report continues the legal discussion about practical limits on the topics Congress could expect try to address in regulating the topics of potential litigation before the Court.

To anyone that has taken any courses on constitutional law (and I have taken a handful of undergraduate courses when I was a political science major), this discussion is hardly unusual, but for most folks (including the majority of congresscritters) it demonstrates how complicated these matters can get. Still, this relatively short report (20 pages) is well worth reading. 

CRS Reports – Week of 5-4-24 – H5N1 in Cattle

This week the Congressional Research Service published a report on “Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Dairy Herds”. The report provides an overview of the recent detection of H5N1, or ‘Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza’ (HPAI) in dairy cattle. It discusses the authorities and responsibilities for USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), and the FDA in dealing with such disease outbreaks. It also describes the testing that has been done to date to establish the limits of the outbreak and its potential impact on the food supply. The report notes that no infections have been reported to date in beef cattle, only dairy cattle.

Commentary

If you have been following my Short Takes post, you will be aware that I am watching this outbreak relatively closely. It is not a chemical security issue (duh), but after watching how well this country reacted to and responded to the COVID epidemic, I am interested in seeing how well the government responds to future potential epidemics. At this point, this is a low-threat disease for humans, which is a good thing. But…, this is influenza, a disease that is well known for its adaptability and mutagenicity. It deserves further watch and study.

This report is fairly straightforward reporting on the current status of the outbreak. What is missing is one of the mainstays of CRS reports, a look forward to the issues with which Congress might expect to have to deal. APHIS has a budget for animal testing activities. As the agency expands its support of H5N1 testing in dairy and beef cattle, this will inevitably take away funds from other animal testing activities. The report notes that (pg 2):

“In the case of dairy herd infections with H5N1, APHIS announced that the [National Animal Health Laboratory Network] NAHLN laboratories will be reimbursed for (1) testing suspect dairy cattle, (2) pre-movement testing, (3) tests requested by producers of asymptomatic cattle, and (4) testing of samples from other animals on dairies with HPAI infections.”

If APHIS is going to try to get an idea of how widespread this outbreak really is, numbers 3 and 4 above are going to be very important. Perhaps it would be reasonable for Congress to begin to consider setting aside additional monies for not just the reimbursement for the actual sample testing, but also support for organized sample collection efforts.

CRS Reports – Week of 10-7-23 – Defense Industrial Base

The Congressional Research Service published a report on “US Defense Industrial Base: Background and Issues for Congress”. The document summary explains:

“The DIB encompasses a wide variety of entities, including commercial firms operated on a for profit basis, not-for-profit research centers and university laboratories, and government-owned industrial facilities. It provides everything from large, technologically sophisticated weapons platforms (e.g., nuclear submarines) and highly specialized operational support (e.g., intelligence analysis) to general commercial products (e.g., laptop computers) and routine services (e.g., information technology support). By supplying and equipping the armed services, the DIB enables the United States to execute national strategy and develop, maintain, and project military power.”

There is a minor cybersecurity mention in the discussion on Supply Chain Resilience, particularly in regards to the “proliferation of counterfeit items (particularly for microelectronics)”, but the report provides little focus on those issue, completely missing, for instance, any discussion about the impact of the DOD’s Cyber Security Maturity Model certification process. Instead the report focuses on overseas sourcing and domestic content issues.

CRS Reports – Week of 6-3-23 – Trump Classified Info Indictment

This week the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a report on “The Mar-a-Lago Indictment: A Legal Introduction”. The Report provides an overview of the legal issues in the charges involved in this week’s indictment of former President Trump. The topics discussed include:

• Summary of the charges,

• 18 USC 793,

• Presidential Control over Access to Classified Information and Materials, and

• The Special Master, Grand Juries, and Special Counsel

The report very carefully avoids looking at the political issues associated with indicting a former President or an active political candidate for President.

CRS Reports – Week of 3-18-23 – DHS Overview

This week the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a report on “The Department of Homeland Security: A Primer”. The report provides an overview of the structure and history of DHS. As noted in the introduction: “This report is intended to brief congressional staff on the mission, structure, staffing, and funding of DHS.”

At the program level, this report is not very deep. It does not, for instance, break out the various authorized and not authorized programs within CISA, including no mention of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) or ChemLock programs for instance. To be fair, at 32 pages, that may be a bit more information than space would allow.

CRS Reports – Week of 3-11-23 – Big Tech Regulation

With the continuing interest in Congress on potential regulation of ‘Big Technology’ industry, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a summary document looking at the recent reports that the CRS has prepared on related topics. Those topics include:

• Antitrust issues,

• Content moderation and §230,

• Content moderation and free speech,

• Data protection and international data flow,

• Cross-border investment and commercial transactions,

• Net neutrality and common carrier classification,

There is very little actual discussion in this report, it is more of a CRS bibliography. The drawback to the document is that while it lists CRS report numbers, it does not provide direct links to the documents. A reader wishing to access one of the listed documents would have to copy the report number and conduct a search on the CRS Reports search page. The reason for this is that CRS frequently updates reports while keeping the same report number. Searching for the report number would take you to the most current information.

CRS Reports – Week of 2-25-23 – Monitoring Air Space

This week the Congressional Research Service published a report on “Monitoring the Sovereign Skies”. The report looks at issues raised during the recent Chinese ‘weather’ balloon incident about how the US military and civilian air space controllers monitor traffic in the National Air Space. This is a relatively low-tech coverage targeted at law makers.

This report looks at:

• Sovereignty of airspace,

• Aircraft identification and tracking,

• Unmanned balloons,

• Other unmanned aircraft, and

• Air defense identification zones and airspace restrictions.

Interestingly, there is no section dealing with ‘issues for Congress’. Apparently, the author has not seen any indication that Congress might want to legislatively or investigationally address the problem.

CRS Reports – Week of 2-24-23 – Grid Physical Security

This week the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a report on “Electric Grid Physical Security: Recent Developments”. This is an update of the report originally reported on January 9^th, 2023. It adds a brief mention of the February 6^th arrest of “two individuals for planning to attack five electric power transmission substations around Baltimore, MD, allegedly as part of a “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremist” conspiracy.”

The new version adds a new, final sentence in the ‘Congressional Initiatives’ section of the report: “As CIP-014 implementation and other physical security initiatives proceed, Congress also may examine the power sector’s overall progress in securing its infrastructure, including organizational and structural changes supporting physical security as a corporate priority.” We can almost certainly expect congressional hearings in both the House and Senate on this topic.

CRS Reports – Non-Profit Security Grant Program

This week the Congressional Research Service published a report on “Nonprofit Security Grant Program: Summary and Potential Issues for Congress”. The report looks FEMA’s Non-Profit Security Grant (NPSG) program authorized under 6 USC 609a. The grant program provides funds to nonprofit organizations for “target hardening and other security enhancements to protect against terrorist attacks” {§609a(a)}. Cybersecurity enhancements, specifically {§609a(c)(3)} including “cybersecurity resilience activities” are permitted uses for the funds in this program.

This report raises two important program transparency issues:

• DHS does not publicly announce specific NSGP awards due to the sensitivity and classification of that information, and

• Once the annual grant award cycle begins, Congress and other policy stakeholders are unable to determine which nonprofits are receiving NSGP funding.

Not mentioned in the report is a requirement in §609a(e) for FEMA to prepare an annual report to Congress (the Homeland Security Committees) “on the expenditure by each grant recipient of grant funds made under this section.”

With spending allocation a ‘major concern’ of Republicans in the House, this issue may be raised in the House Homeland Security Committee (and perhaps in legislation) during the session.

CRS Reports – Cybersecurity – Week of 12-3-22

The Congressional Research Service published two reports this week related to cybersecurity issues:

• Defense Primer: Cyberspace Operations, and

• Cybersecurity: A Primer

While not exactly cybersecurity, the first publication provides a quick overview of military operations in the cyber realm. There is no discussion of on-going congressional issues on this topic.

The second report provides a broad look at cybersecurity in information systems. It contains a brief mention of IoT issues, but does not even mention control systems or operations technology. There is a brief (if overly broad) discussion of potential issues for congressional consideration.

These CRS reports are going to be increasingly important in the coming months as the 118^th Congress starts into session. This Congress contains a fairly large contingent of new Representatives and Senators and of course their staffs. CRS reports will be an important tool to be used by the newbies on Capitol Hill to begin formulating positions and policies on unfamiliar topics.

CRS Reports – Week of 11-26-22 – FTX Reports

This week the Congressional Research Service published two reports related to crash of FTX Trading:

• SEC Jurisdiction and Perceived Crypto-Asset Regulatory Gap: An FTX Case Study, and

• What Happened at FTX and What Does It Mean for Crypto?

SEC Jurisdiction

The first report takes a look at the SEC investigation. Interestingly, FTX Trading is not subject to SEC jurisdiction because it did not operate in the United States. A subsidiary, FTX.US, with a more limited scope of investment activities, is registered and licensed in the US.

Topics covered in this report include:

• SEC investigation of FTX,

• SEC jurisdiction,

• Perceived crypto-asset regulatory gap, and

• Policy questions for congress

What Happened

The second report looks at the currently available information about how the FTX crash happened and what it means for future crypto-asset policies. Topics addressed include:

• What is FTX and what happened?

• Another “crypto winter”, and

• Policy options for Congress

An interesting policy point is made:

“Currently, there is no comprehensive regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies or other digital assets. Instead, various state and federal financial industry regulators apply existing frameworks and regulations where exchanges or digital assets resemble traditional financial products. As such, regulators may treat digital assets as securities, commodities, or currencies depending on the circumstances.”

CRS Reports

The CRS is the research arm of Congress. These reports are designed to inform legislators and their staffs about issues upon which Congress may be called to regulate or oversee. While individual legislators and staff members may rely on other sources of information, for members not intimately involved or interested in a specific topic, CRS reports may form the most comprehensive source of information upon which they rely upon for supporting policy actions.

CRS Reports – House Legislative Procedures

This week, the Congressional Research Service updated four publications that deal with legislative processes in the House. They describe the process included in the rules of the House and they ways that the leadership can revise or avoid those processes. The reports include:

• Availability of Legislative Measures in the House of Representatives (The “72-Hour Rule”),

• Considering Legislation on the House Floor: Common Practices in Brief,

• Suspension of the Rules in the House: Principal Features, and

• Resolutions of Inquiry in the House  

Resolutions of Inquiry have not been really common until the last couple of weeks in the current session. In the last week alone, there have been fifteen resolutions of inquiry introduced in the House:

• H Res 1236 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide certain documents in his possession to the House of Representatives relating to the Disinformation Governance Board. Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5] ,

• H Res 1237 Of inquiry requesting the President to provide certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to online censorship of political speech. Rep. Bishop, Dan [R-NC-9],

• H Res 1238 Of inquiry requesting the President to provide certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the October 4, 2021 memorandum issued by the Attorney General entitled "Partnership Among Federal, State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Law Enforcement to Address Threats Against School Administrators, Board Members, Teachers, and Staff". Rep. Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5],

• H Res 1239 Of inquiry directing the Attorney General to provide certain documents in his possession to the House of Representatives relating to the October 4, 2021 memorandum issued by the Attorney General entitled "Partnership Among Federal, State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Law Enforcement to Address Threats Against School Administrators, Board Members, Teachers, and Staff". Rep. Johnson, Mike [R-LA-4],

• H Res 1241 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide certain documents in his possession to the House of Representatives relating to immigration enforcement and border security. Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-4],

• H Res 1243 Of inquiry requesting the President transmit certain documents in his possession to the House of Representatives relating to the Biden family's international business schemes and related information. Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1] ,

• H Res 1244 Of inquiry requesting the President and directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to transmit, respectively, certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to any COVID-19 vaccine. Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-4],

• H Res 1246 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of the Treasury to provide certain documents in the Secretary's possession to the House of Representatives relating to recovery rebates under section 6428B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Rep. Smith, Jason [R-MO-8],

• H Res 1247 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of the Interior to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the 2023-2028 five-year program for offshore oil and gas leasing. Rep. Graves, Garret [R-LA-6],

• H Res 1248 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of the Interior to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the compliance with the obligations of the Mineral Leasing Act. Rep. Herrell, Yvette [R-NM-2],

• H Res 1249 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of the Interior to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the impact of illegal immigration on federal or tribal lands. Rep. Moore, Blake D. [R-UT-1],

• H Res 1250 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the impact of illegal immigration on Federal or Tribal lands. Rep. Moore, Blake D. [R-UT-1],

• H Res 1251 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of Agriculture to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the mineral withdrawal within the Superior National Forest. Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8],

• H Res 1252 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of the Interior to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the mineral withdrawal within the Superior National Forest. Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8], and

• H Res 1253 Of inquiry directing the Secretary of the Interior to transmit certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to the actions of the Department of the Interior's Departmental Ethics Office. Rep. Westerman, Bruce [R-AR-4]

A quick look at the subjects makes it obvious that these requests stem from basic disagreements between the more conservative wing of the Republican Party and the current Biden Administration. It is also clear that there is little to no chance that any of these resolutions would be expected to be adopted in Committee or passed on the floor of the House.

It would seem that this is another attempt to delay operations of the House in the lead up to the end of the fiscal year, both in Committee and potentially on the floor of the House. This is because resolutions of inquiry are privileged and require action in Committee within 14 days of introduction, or it may be called to the floor by person who introduced the resolution.

CRS Reports – Week of 5-28-22

 This week there were four reports from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) that are of interest here:

• Carbon Dioxide Pipelines: Safety Issues (IN11944),

• Sifting Domestic Terrorism from Domestic Violent Extremism and Hate Crime (IN10299),

• Department of Defense Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (IF11426),

• U.S. Electricity Sector: Summer 2022 Outlook (IN11943)

CO2 Pipelines

This report looks at a significant potential increase in the number of CO2 pipelines that are designed to take CO2 from the point of origination to the point where it is pumped into the ground as part of the process of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As with most pipelines, there is some level of local opposition to the siting of these pipelines due to public safety concerns. While CO2 is not toxic, there are safety issues with any compressed gas pipelines. As with any non-oxygen atmospheric chemicals there are potential asphyxiation hazards with any large scale release.

The report notes that PHMSA recently announced that they were initiating a rulemaking on CO2 pipeline safety. It then goes on to suggest that the conflict between the need for CO2 sequestration and public safety concerns many need attention by Congress.

Domestic Terrorism

This report looks at the linguistic and legalistic differences between the terms ‘domestic terrorism’, ‘domestic violent extremism’, and ‘hate crimes’. With the recent increase in incidents like the active shooter attack in Buffalo the technical and practical differences between these terms will likely become an issue for Congress. Ultimately, they will end up having implications for personnel responsible for providing security (both physical and cyber) for critical infrastructure.

Counter UAS

The increasing sophistication and success in the use of armed unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in in conflicts around the world is certainly a harbinger of the use of similar systems for attacks by criminals and terrorists on critical infrastructure facilities. While there are still significant legal restrictions on taking actions to interfere with UAS flights in the airspace of the United States, the military’s development of weapons to take down such vehicles will certainly become important to those responsible for protecting critical infrastructure.

Electric Sector Outlook

This report looks at potential disruptions to the delivery of electricity in large parts of the Unites States this summer. A combination of increased temperatures, increased use of electric vehicles, and a reduction in the number of coal plants on-line, look like they are going to set the stage for rolling blackouts and unscheduled service interruptions. Oh, and just toss in the potential threat from Russian cyberattacks in retaliation for US support of Ukraine, and it looks like it may be a real long hot summer.

CRS Reports – Cybersecurity Insurance and the War in Ukraine

This week the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a report on “Insurance, Cyberattacks, and War in Ukraine”. It includes a general discussion about the potential impact of war clauses on insurance policies and how such clauses have been handled in the courts in relation to cyber insurance.

CRS Reports – Cybersecurity – Week of 3-12-22

This week the Congressional Research Service published a report on “Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience: Countering Russian and Other Nation-State Cyber Threats”. The report provides an overview of federal and private sector activities related to cybersecurity. One odd point about this report is that there are no links or footnotes to the references used to prepare the report. This reduces the utility of the report.

CRS Reports – Ukraine Invasion – 2-26-22

This week the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published two early reports on the US and allied response to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine:

Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: Overview of U.S. and Allied Responses, and

Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: NATO Response

This is still very early in the conflict so the information in these documents is certainly subject to modification as the situation develops.

CRS Reports – Terrorism Risk Insurance Act

This week, the Congressional Research Service published a report on “The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA)”. The report looks at the creation and reauthorization of the program that is designed to backstop insurance companies in the event of a major terrorist attack. It includes a brief discussion about the potential coverage of ‘cyberterrorism’. It specifically notes that:

“A cyberterrorist event, however, must meet all other thresholds in TRIA, which might reduce TRIA’s applicability to such cyberattacks.”