Search

The article focuses on the various parliamentary reference sources used in the House of Representatives to understand and follow House procedures, including rules, precedents, statutes, and informal practices. These sources, such as House Practice, the House Manual, Deschler's Precedents, and resolutions from the House Committee on Rules, provide insight into daily proceedings and help navigate specific procedural situations encountered in the House.

The article provides an overview of key statutes enacted by the U.S. Congress that allow public access to information about the federal government's operations, information the government might collect on individuals and insight into some of the government's decisionmaking processes. Topics include the conceptual definition of government information, what it means for a user to access information, a description of the information life cycle and the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

The article focuses on the second part of the Biden Administration's Final Rule on Arriving Aliens Seeking Asylum. It explores the legal considerations related to the rule, including potential violations of international treaty obligations and federal statutes governing asylum. It mentions that discussion centers on arguments concerning the Refugee Protocol and federal statutes, addressing the rule's compliance with U.S. law and its impact on asylum eligibility.

The article discusses the historical evolution of internet regulation in the United States, particularly during the 1990s when the government favored limited oversight and encouraged self-regulation by the private sector. It outlines key federal statutes related to the internet, such as the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Communications Decency Act, including the influential Section 230.

Multiyear procurement (MYP) and block buy contracting (BBC) are special contracting mechanisms that Congress permits the Department of Defense (DOD) to use for a limited number of defense acquisition programs. Compared to the standard or default approach of annual contracting, MYP and BBC have the potential for reducing weapon procurement costs by a few or several percent. Under annual contracting, DOD uses one or more contracts for each year's worth of procurement of a given kind of item. Under MYP, DOD instead uses a single contract for two to five years' worth of procurement of a given kind of item without having to exercise a contract option for each year after the first year. DOD needs congressional approval for each use of MYP. There is a permanent statute governing MYP contracting-10 U.S.C. 3501 (the text of which was previously codified at 10 U.S.C. 2306b). Under this statute, a program must meet several criteria to qualify for MYP. Compared with estimated costs under annual contracting, estimated savings for programs being proposed for MYP have ranged from less than 5% to more than 15%, depending on the particulars of the program in question, with many estimates falling in the range of 5% to 10%. In practice, actual savings from using MYP rather than annual contracting can be difficult to observe or verify because of cost growth during the execution of the contract due to changes in the program independent of the use of MYP rather than annual contracting. BBC is similar to MYP in that it permits DOD to use a single contract for more than one year's worth of procurement of a given kind of item without having to exercise a contract option for each year after the first year. BBC is also similar to MYP in that DOD needs congressional approval for each use of BBC. BBC differs from MYP in the following ways: • There is no permanent statute governing the use of BBC. • There is no requirement that BBC be approved in both a DOD appropriations act and an act other than a DOD appropriations act. • Programs being considered for BBC do not need to meet any legal criteria to qualify for BBC, because there is no permanent statute governing the use of BBC that establishes such criteria. • A BBC contract can cover more than five years of planned procurements. • Economic order quantity (EOQ) authority-the authority to bring forward selected key components of the items to be procured under the contract and purchase the components in batch form during the first year or two of the contract-does not come automatically as part of BBC authority because there is no permanent statute governing the use of BBC that includes EOQ authority as an automatic feature. • BBC contracts are less likely to include cancellation penalties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern forfeiture is a creature of statute that calls for the confiscation of certain property related to a criminal offense. Forfeiture has long been a tool of law enforcement in the United States. Congress and state legislatures have authorized its use for over 200 years. Every year, it redirects millions of dollars' worth of property connected to criminal activity to lawful uses. Forfeiture law has always been somewhat unique. By the close of the 20th century, however, legislative bodies, commentators, and the courts had begun to examine its eccentricities in greater detail because under some circumstances it could be not only harsh but unfair. The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), P.L. 106-185, 114 Stat. 202 (2000), was a product of that reexamination. Modern forfeiture follows one of two procedural routes. Although crime triggers all forfeitures, they are classified as civil forfeitures or criminal forfeitures according to the nature of the procedure which ends in confiscation. Civil forfeiture is an in rem proceeding. The property is the defendant in the case. Unless the statute provides otherwise, the innocence of the owner is irrelevant-it is enough that the property was involved in a violation to which forfeiture attaches. As a matter of expedience and judicial economy, Congress often allows administrative forfeiture in uncontested civil confiscation cases. Criminal forfeiture is an in personam proceeding, and confiscation is possible only upon the conviction of the owner of the property. The Supreme Court has held that authorities may seize moveable property without prior notice or an opportunity for a hearing but that real property owners are entitled as a matter of due process to preseizure notice and a hearing. As a matter of due process, innocence may be irrelevant in the case of an individual who entrusts his or her property to someone who uses the property for criminal purposes. Although some civil forfeitures may be considered punitive for purposes of the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause, civil forfeitures do not implicate the Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause unless they are so utterly punitive as to belie remedial classification. The statutes governing the disposal of forfeited property may authorize its destruction, its transfer for governmental purposes, or deposit of the property or of the proceeds from its sale in a special fund. Intra- and intergovernmental transfers and the use of special funds are hallmarks of federal forfeiture. Every year, federal agencies share among themselves the proceeds of jointly conducted forfeitures. They also transfer hundreds of millions of dollars and property to state, local, and foreign law enforcement officials as compensation for their contribution to joint enforcement efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern forfeiture is a creature of statute that calls for the confiscation of certain property related to a criminal offense. Forfeiture has long been a law enforcement tool in the United States. Congress and state legislatures have authorized its use for over 200 years. Every year, it redirects billions of dollars worth of property connected to criminal activity to other uses. Forfeiture law has always been somewhat unique. By the close of the 20th century, however, legislative bodies, commentators, and the courts had begun to examine its eccentricities in greater detail because under some circumstances it could be not only harsh but unfair. The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), Pub. L. No. 106-185, 114 Stat. 202 (2000), was a product of that reexamination. Modern forfeiture follows one of two procedural routes. Although crime triggers all forfeitures, they are classified as civil forfeitures or criminal forfeitures according to the nature of the procedure which ends in confiscation. Civil forfeiture is an in rem proceeding. The property is the defendant in the case. Unless the statute provides otherwise, the innocence of the owner is irrelevant-it is enough that the property was involved in a violation to which forfeiture attaches. As a matter of expedience and judicial economy, Congress often allows administrative forfeiture in uncontested civil confiscation cases. Criminal forfeiture is an in personam proceeding, and confiscation is possible only upon the conviction of the owner of the property. The Supreme Court has held that authorities may seize moveable property without prior notice or an opportunity for a hearing but that real property owners are entitled as a matter of due process to preseizure notice and a hearing. As a matter of due process, innocence may be irrelevant in the case of an individual who entrusts his or her property to someone who uses the property for criminal purposes. Although some civil forfeitures may be considered punitive for purposes of the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause, civil forfeitures do not implicate the Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause unless they are so utterly punitive as to belie remedial classification. The statutes governing the disposal of forfeited property may authorize its destruction, its transfer for governmental purposes, or deposit of the property or of the proceeds from its sale in a special fund. Intra- and intergovernmental transfers and the use of special funds are hallmarks of federal forfeiture. Every year, federal agencies share among themselves the proceeds of jointly conducted forfeitures. They also transfer hundreds of millions of dollars and property to state, local, and foreign law enforcement officials as compensation for their contribution to joint enforcement efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Congress's lawmaking role does not end when it passes legislation and oversight is fundamental to make sure that laws are working as intended and are being administered in an effective, efficient, and economical manner. It mentions mechanics of oversight practice based on House and Senate rules, common investigative techniques, and an inventory of statutes that impact oversight activity.

The article discusses the Child Nutrition Reauthorization (CNR), which is the process by which U.S. Congress makes changes to the statutes authorizing child nutrition programs, including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). It also mentions the programs typically included in CNR, related policies in the Farm Bill, the last reauthorization in 2010, and reauthorization efforts in the 117th Congress.

The article offers information on the gun policy framework in the U.S. Topics mentioned include the federal statutory framework concerning firearm sale, transfer, and possession, the implementation of the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and the provisions of the National Firearms Act.

The article discusses congressional interest in small business size standards as they play a pivotal role in determining eligibility for Small Business Administration(SBA). Topics discussed include different laws and acts related to small business, business size standards based on industry competitiveness and federal statutes for small business.

The article discusses the role of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes. Topics include the responsibility of local enforcement agencies in probing hate crimes, the duty of local district attorneys' offices in prosecuting them, as well as some federal statutes covering hate crimes like the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights.

The article offers information on Congressional Gold Medal. It mentions that Congress expresses public gratitude on behalf of the nation for distinguished contributions; process includes consultation and recommendations by Commission of Fine Arts; and statutory limitations for offering the gold medals.

The article discusses the legal limitations and practice in questioning judicial nominees by the members of the U.S. Senate. Topics include the questions that a nominee may or may not answer during the confirmation hearing, the codes of judicial conduct and the federal statutes and canons of judicial conduct that may disqualify a nominee.

The article presents a report by the Congressional Research Service on the federal programs in the U.S. on renewable energy and energy efficiency incentives. Topics include federal programs that provide grants, loans, loan guarantees, and other direct or indirect incentives for energy efficiency, energy conservation, and renewable energy and the administering agency, authorizing statute(s), annual funding, and the program expiration date.

The article offers an overview of U.S. federal statutes in their various forms aimed to provide basic guidance for congressional staff interested in researching statutes. Topics covered include the commercial and noncommercial sources of slip laws, the convenience of searching the U.S. Code than the Statutes at Large, and the assistance given to researchers in locating statutes, as well identifying statutes that may have been amended, omitted, transferred, or repealed.

In the tripartite structure of the U.S. federal government, it is the job of courts to say what the law is, as Chief Justice John Marshall announced in 1803. When courts render decisions on the meaning of statutes, the prevailing view is that a judge's task is not to make the law, but rather to interpret the law made by Congress. The two main theories of statutory interpretation- purposivism and textualism-disagree about how judges can best adhere to this ideal of legislative supremacy. The problem is especially acute in instances where it is unlikely that Congress anticipated and legislated for the specific circumstances being disputed before the court. While purposivists argue that courts should prioritize interpretations that advance the statute's purpose, textualists maintain that a judge's focus should be confined primarily to the statute's text. Regardless of their interpretive theory, judges use many of the same tools to gather evidence of statutory meaning. First, judges often begin by looking to the ordinary meaning of the statutory text. Second, courts interpret specific provisions by looking to the broader statutory context. Third, judges may turn to the canons of construction, which are presumptions about how courts ordinarily read statutes. Fourth, courts may look to the legislative history of a provision. Finally, a judge might consider how a statute has been-or will be-implemented. Although both purposivists and textualists may use any of these tools, a judge's theory of statutory interpretation may influence the order in which these tools are applied and how much weight is given to each tool. This report begins by discussing the general goals of statutory interpretation, reviewing a variety of contemporary as well as historical approaches. The report then briefly describes the two primary theories of interpretation employed today, before examining the main types of tools that courts use to determine statutory meaning. The report concludes by exploring developing issues in statutory interpretation [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the procedures by which a legislative measure is acted upon by a committee in the U.S. House of Representatives in the course of reporting. It mentions that a legislative committee may approve a draft as amended and be marked either as a managers' amend or subcommittee-approved amendments. It adds that once a measure is approved, the committee can vote on a motion to report the measure.

The article discusses the 1973 court case Roe v. Wade, in which U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the U.S. Constitution protects a woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy. Topics include partial-birth abortion, public funding of therapeutic or medically necessary abortions, and bills that seek to prohibit the right to abortion by statute.

The article discusses doctrine of federal preemption, which is grounded in the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the constitution. It mentions that disputes over the desirability of broad federal preemption implicate a range of values. It reveals that the Supreme Court has identified ways in which federal law can preempt state law including explicit preemptive language in federal statute.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case Christie v. National Collegiate Athletic Association wherein the court consider whether a federal statute understood to bar the partial repeal of sports gambling prohibition runs afoul of the anti-commandeering principle under the Tenth Amendment. It notes that case resolution of the court could be consequential for the anti-commandeering doctrine. The federal statute involves the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (PASPA).

The funding authorization for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), included in the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-190), expires on September 30, 2017. In addition to setting spending levels, FAA authorization acts typically set policy on a wide range of issues related to civil aviation. This report considers topics that are likely to arise as the 115th Congress debates reauthorization. Most FAA programs are financed through the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF), which is funded by a variety of taxes and fees on air transportation. The financial health of the AATF is generally good. However, changes in airline business practices could pose a risk to revenue. In particular, airlines’ unbundling of ancillary fees from airfares is adversely affecting AATF revenue, as only base airfares are subject to the ticket tax that is the largest source of revenue for the trust fund. Reductions in AATF revenue would leave FAA more reliant on appropriations from the general fund. Other major issues likely to arise during the reauthorization debate include the following: • Unmanned aerial vehicles. Large numbers of drones have come into use, and the numerous reports of near-collisions between drones and manned aircraft raise safety concerns. Additionally, Congress has not addressed privacy concerns related to government-operated, commercial, and recreational drones. • Air traffic control privatization. Many commissions over the years have recommended moving responsibility for air traffic control from FAA, a government agency, to either an independent government-owned corporation or a private entity controlled by aviation stakeholders. Delays in implementing the satellite-based NextGen air traffic control system have renewed interest in this possibility, although Congress chose not to enact such proposals in 2016. • Essential Airline Service (EAS). Congress has repeatedly attempted to limit the number of localities eligible to participate in this program to subsidize flights to communities that would otherwise lose all commercial airline service, as well as to limit the amount of subsidies per passenger. Few communities have been dropped from the program, and costs continue to rise. • Foreign airlines. Some U.S. airlines and airline labor unions seek reconsideration of the recent U.S. approval of a foreign carrier permit for Norwegian Air International, an Ireland-based discount air carrier, to fly across the Atlantic. Some U.S. carriers also have called for renegotiation of U.S. air service agreements with Persian Gulf states amid claims that three fast-growing airlines based in that region are posing unfair competition to U.S. air carriers. • Certification reform. FAA relies heavily on aircraft and aircraft parts manufacturers to provide technical expertise in the certification process. FAA oversight has been found to be inconsistent, raising questions regarding safety and efficiency. Equipment manufacturers have raised concerns that FAA’s certification process makes it difficult to bring new products to market in a timely fashion and threatens their international competitiveness. This report does not attempt to be comprehensive. Many issues debated prior to passage of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 are not discussed unless further congressional consideration appears probable. Additional issues, not discussed in this report, may arise as Congress moves forward with reauthorization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides an overview of the case of Carcieri v. Salazar in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a 1934 statute has no authority for the Secretary of Interior (SOI) to take land into trust for the Narragansett Indian Tribe as it applies to the 1934 federal jurisdiction. Topics discussed include the appellate court rulings, potential impact of the Supreme Court's ruling land acquisition for gaming.

The article discusses statutory provisions relating to the separation of U.S. military officers. Topics explored include the eligibility of officers and military service members for voluntary retirement after completing the required years of active service, factors which contribute to mandatory separation such as lack of qualifications for promotion and substandard performance, and the retirement considerations involving physical disability and related circumstances.

The article lists the considerations for the U.S. Congress when addressing general and flag officer (GFOs)authorizations, compensation, duties, and other relevant topics in detail as of February 2016 and presents a chart depicting the positions of GFOs along with their duties, statute, and service.

The article talks about the natural law system and its link to divine justice. It discusses the law perspective named formalism for interpreting the definition of statutory text, how the theory of formalism worked irrespective of judges' attitude as agents of U.S. Congress or as important for law elaboration and courts' language of the statute.

The article offers information on the statutory provisions of the student-serving Federal TRIO programs. It mentions that the U.S. Education Department (ED) consider the prior experience (PE) of every applicant on service delivery and the extent to which student-serving TRIO program grantee meet prior grant objectives. It presents a table of the statutory outcome criteria for the student-serving TRIO programs relative to the U.S. Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) amendments.

The article discusses the relationship between the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and other U.S. authorities on procurement. Topics covered include the relationship between the FAR and procurement or other statutes, the relationship between the FAR and agency FAR supplements, and the relationship between the FAR and other regulations.

The article discusses the legislative options that are available to form the organizational structure and powers of U.S. congressional commissions. Topics include the language contained in statutes establishing congressional policy commissions that states the mandate of the commission, the membership schemes and appointment structures used by congressional commissions, and task of these commissions to appoint a staff director and other personnel as necessary.

The article focuses on how U.S. congress could still change the legal system without the violation of the separation of powers law. It discusses how the Klein case of 1871 ruled how the U.S. congress cannot delay the judgement of a court by compromising the judiciary's right to take decisions independently although it could amend the laws and apply it to pending lawsuits.

The article offers information on the role of the U.S. Congress on the creation of Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committees. Topics discussed include the creation of the Congress of majority of the FACA committees, the comparison of the Congress' statutorily required and authorized committees, and a table that lists the federal advisory committees required by statute in different departments including Department of Defense, Department of Interior, and Department of Labor.

The article outlines the statutory authorities triggered by the existence of a state of war and thus also by a declaration of war by the U.S. Congress and the President. Topics covered include administrative procedure, federal employees, Trading With Enemy Act, reemployment rights, and armed forces. Statutes concerning reserves, Coast Guard, criminal prosecutions, imports, nuclear energy, infectious diseases, and veterans' care are also cited.

The article discusses statutory authorities triggered by existence or declaration of national emergency by the U.S. Congress and the President. Topics covered include federal employees, agriculture, armed forces, Davis-Bacon Act, National Emergencies Act, and customs service. Statutes concerning foreign relations, federal highways, airports, real property and contracts, and public health are also mentioned.

The article outlines statutory authorities triggered by a declaration of war by the U.S. Congress and the President. Topics discussed include the requirements of the Congressional Budget Act, the President's power to prohibit or curtail the export of any agricultural commodity, and statutory authorities related to armed forces, Coast Guard, and National Defense Stockpile. Statutes concerning deferral of civil works projects and unilateral trade sanctions are also cited.

The article discusses several statutes existing to protect information depending on its nature, identity of the discloser and to those to whom it was disclosed. It cites the Espionage Act which protects national defense information in general with some provisions applying only to government employees authorized access to sensitive government information. It notes that there is ample statutory authority to prosecute individuals who elicit or disseminate classified information.

The article identifies U.S. criminal statutes that may apply to the publication of classified defense information that have been used almost exclusively to prosecute individuals with access to classified information. It discusses the statutory prohibitions that may be implicated such as the Espionage Act, the extraterritorial application of these statutes and the First Amendment implications related to prosecutions against domestic or foreign media organizations and associated individuals.

The article discusses proposed revisions for statutes on cybersecurity in the U.S. as of 2013. One statute is the Posse Comitatus Act of 1879, which prohibits using military forces in civilian law enforcement. One proposal is to amend this law to clarify when the military can operate domestically concerning cyber threats. Other laws include the Antitrust Laws and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act and the Federal Power Act.

This publication provides an overview of cybersecurity laws in the U.S. and discusses some proposed revisions. It is noted that the country has more than 50 statutes that directly or indirectly address various aspects of cybersecurity, but an overarching framework legislation is missing. Proposed legislation on cybersecurity are said to have focused on national strategy, reform of the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) and cybercrime, among others.

The article examines some major federal statutes on information-gathering and disclosure statutes that restrict foreign investments in the U.S. An overview of the aims of the International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act of 1976 is provided. Also discussed is the Foreign Direct Investment and International Financial Data Improvements Act of 1990, the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978 and Domestic and Foreign Investment Improved Disclosure Act of 1977.

The article discusses the constitutional justifications and limitations concerning federal statutory restrictions on foreign investments in the U.S. The constitutional bases for foreign investment legislation include the federal powers over immigration and naturalization and the power to provide for the national defense. An overview of the power of the Congress is provided. Some bilateral treaties regulation trade and investment relations are discussed.

The article looks at some of the major U.S. federal statutes that restrict foreign investments. A brief history of foreign investments in the U.S. is provided. It examines the existing constitutional justifications and limitations concerning federal statutory restrictions on property ownership by foreigners. Also discussed are some of the major federal statutes which limit foreign investments in the U.S. such as in communications, banking and mining.

The article offers information on federal statutes that control the sale and ownership of firearms, the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968 and the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. It examines the design of the NFA to regulate the possession of long and machine guns, tax the production of weapons and disclose distribution information. It discusses the purpose of the GCA to assist law enforcement agencies in the reduction of violence and crime.

The article presents a historical overview of the statutes governing the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) through the identification of congressional actions that addressed its role and responsibility. The Secret Service Division (SSD) was established by the Treasury Secretary in 1865 with the primary responsibility of investigating counterfeiting, forging, and altering of U.S. currency and securities. The 47th Congress appropriated funds for SSD, giving it statutory recognition in 1882.

The article examines the statutes that trigger the use of military force or a declaration of war by the U.S. According to the authors, since the term of U.S. president John Adams up to the 2011 administration of U.S. President Barack Obama, there have been various instances when legislation had been established to authorize the use of military force in place of a formal declaration of war. In the 1790s, Adams recommended that the U.S. Congress enacted legislation that will authorize the use of U.S. naval vessels to protect the country against the French.

The article presents an overview of the statutory rulemaking requirements in the U.S. It focuses on the requirements that are applicable to more than one agency. It describes some of the major rulemaking-related statutes including the Federal Register Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. Other major laws considered in this report include the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

The article presents the text of the five National Security Letters (NSL) statutes in their current form and prior to amendment by the U.S.A. PATRIOT Act. It discusses the provision of Section 505 of the USA PATRIOT Act which deals with NSL authority. Findings of the Department of Justice Inspector General (IG) in its reports on the use of NSL authority are also presented. It details the proposed amendments to the law governing NSL including foreign intelligence investigations sunset and repeal, nondisclosure provisions and minimization requirements.

Federal authorities can and have prosecuted terrorist attacks on commercial airlines under a wide variety of federal statutes. Some of those statutes outlaw crimes committed aboard a commercial airliner; some, crimes committed against the aircraft itself; others, crimes involving the use of firearms or explosives; still others, crimes committed for terrorist purposes. Within each category, the law reaches co-conspirators and other accomplices. Moreover, although most apply when committed within the United States, many apply to terrorist attacks overseas, particularly but necessarily, when the victims are Americans or U.S. airlines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A variety of statutes and agency regulations govern leasing and permitting for energy projects, including oil and natural gas development as well as alternative energy projects, on federal lands. This report explains the legal framework for energy leasing and development on federal lands. The report reviews laws and regulations affecting leasing of federal lands for exploration and production of oil and natural gas, which have evolved under a complex leasing system over the last century. The report also addresses existing laws and regulations that affect the use of federal lands for renewable energy projects, including geothermal, wind, and solar energy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are no federal statutes or Rules of the Senate that directly affect the status of a Senator who has been indicted for a crime that constitutes a felony. No rights or privileges are forfeited under the Constitution, statutory law, nor the Rules of the Senate upon an indictment. Thus, under Senate Rules, an indicted Senator may continue to participate in congressional proceedings and considerations; and under the Constitution a person under indictment is not disqualified from being a Member of or a candidate for reelection to Congress. Internal party rules in the Senate may, however, provide for certain steps to be taken by an indicted Senator. For example, the Senate Republican Conference Rules require an indicted chairman or ranking member of a Senate committee, or a member of the party leadership, to temporarily step aside from his or her leadership or chairmanship position. Members of Congress do not automatically forfeit their offices upon conviction of a crime that constitutes a felony. No express constitutional disability or "disqualification" from Congress exists for the conviction of a crime, other than under the Fourteenth Amendment for certain treasonous conduct by someone who has taken an oath of office to support the Constitution. Unlike Members of the House, Senators are not instructed by internal Senate Rules to refrain from voting in committee or on the Senate floor once they have been convicted of a crime which carries a particular punishment. Internal party rules in the Senate may affect a Senator's position in committees. Under the Senate Republican Conference Rules, for example, Senators lose their chairmanships of committees or ranking member status upon conviction of a felony. Conviction of certain crimes may subject -- and has subjected in the past -- Senators to internal legislative disciplinary proceedings, including resolutions of censure, as well as an expulsion from the Senate upon approval of two-thirds of the Members. Conviction of certain crimes relating to national security offenses would result in the Member's forfeiture of his or her entire federal pension annuity under the provisions of the so-called "Hiss Act" and, under more recent provisions of law, conviction of particular crimes by Members relating to public corruption will result in the loss of the Member's entire "creditable service" as a Member for purposes of calculating their federal retirement annuities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Almost half of the states outlaw cross burning with the intent to threaten as such. A few of these statutes cover the display of hangman's nooses and other symbols of intimidation as well. Moreover, the same misconduct also frequently falls under more general state prohibitions on coercion, terroristic threats, harassment, or hate crimes. Some of these laws feature a hate crime element without which conviction is not possible; others do not. In either case, there are obvious first amendment implications. The Supreme Court has explained that not all speech, particular expressive conduct, is protected by the First Amendment. However, in R.A.V. v. St. Paul, it held cross burning with the intent to annoy was protected and did not come within the "fighting words" category of unprotected speech. Shortly thereafter, in Black v. Virginia, the Court held that cross burning with the intent to convey a true threat was not protected. Some of the Justices noted another difference between the two cases: the ordinance in R.A.V. had a hate crime element -- the offense had to be motivated by racial or some other discriminatory animus; the statute in Black had no such element. In years since Black was announced, the lower courts have continued to recognize true threats as unprotected, but have also continued to analyze challenges to threat statutes under the First Amendment's overbreadth doctrine and the vagueness doctrine of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments' due process clauses. These laws have generally survived such challenges, although an imprecisely worded statute has fallen victim to a vagueness attack upon occasion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]