Search Results

Terrorist Financing: U.S. Agency Efforts and Inter-Agency Coordination
No Description Available.
Al Qaeda: Profile and Threat Assessment
No Description Available.
Material Support of Terrorists and Foreign Terrorist Organizations: Sunset Amendments
No Description Available.
Material Support of Terrorists and Foreign Terrorist Organizations: Expiring Amendments in Brief
No Description Available.
Terrorism in South Asia
This report reviews the recent incidence of terrorism in South Asia, concentrating on Pakistan and India, but also including Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal. The existence of international terrorist groups and their supporters in South Asia is identified as a threat to both regional stability and to the attainment of central U.S. policy goals. Al Qaeda forces that fled from Afghanistan with their Taliban supporters remain active on Pakistani territory, and Al Qaeda is believed to have links with indigenous Pakistani terrorist groups that have conducted anti-western attacks and that support separatist militancy in Indian Kashmir. Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden and his lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, are widely believed to be in Pakistan.
Digital Surveillance: The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act
The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, P.L. 103- 414, 47 USC 1001-1010), enacted October 25, 1994, is intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement officials to conduct electronic surveillance effectively and efficiently despite the deployment of new digital technologies and wireless services that have altered the character of electronic surveillance. CALEA requires telecommunications carriers to modify their equipment, facilities, and services, wherever reasonably achievable, to ensure that they are able to comply with authorized electronic surveillance actions.
The Department of Defense Rules for Military Commissions: Analysis of Procedural Rules and Comparison with Proposed Legislation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This report provides a background and analysis comparing military commissions as envisioned under M.C.O. No. 1 to general military courts-martial conducted under the UCMJ. The report notes some of the criticism directed at the President’s M.O., and explains how those concerns are addressed by the military commission orders and instructions. The report provides two charts to compare the regulations issued by the Department of Defense and standard procedures for general courts-martial under the Manual for Courts-Martial. The second chart, which compares procedural safeguards incorporated in the regulations with established procedures in courts martial, follows the same order and format used in CRS Report RL31262, Selected Procedural Safeguards in Federal, Military, and International Courts, in order to facilitate comparison with safeguards provided in federal court and the International Criminal Court.
The Department of Defense Rules for Military Commissions: Analysis of Procedural Rules and Comparison with Proposed Legislation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This report provides a background and analysis comparing military commissions as envisioned under M.C.O. (Military Commission Order) No. 1 to general military courts-martial conducted under the UCMJ. The report notes some of the criticism directed at the President's M.O., and explains how those concerns are addressed by the military commission orders and instructions. A summary of the Hamdan case follows, as well as an overview of relevant legislation. Finally, the report provides two charts to compare the regulations issued by the Department of Defense to standard procedures for general courts-martial under the Manual for Courts-Martial and to proposed legislation.
The Department of Defense Rules for Military Commissions: Analysis of Procedural Rules and Comparison with Proposed Legislation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This report provides a background and analysis comparing military commissions as envisioned under M.C.O. No. 1 to general military courts-martial conducted under the UCMJ. The report notes some of the criticism directed at the President’s M.O., and explains how those concerns are addressed by the military commission orders and instructions. The report provides two charts to compare the regulations issued by the Department of Defense and standard procedures for general courts-martial under the Manual for Courts-Martial. The second chart, which compares procedural safeguards incorporated in the regulations with established procedures in courts martial, follows the same order and format used in CRS Report RL31262, Selected Procedural Safeguards in Federal, Military, and International Courts, in order to facilitate comparison with safeguards provided in federal court and the International Criminal Court.
USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization in Brief
No Description Available.
USA PATRIOT Act: Background and Comparison of House- and Senate-approved Reauthorization and Related Legislative Action
The House and Senate have each passed USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Acts, H.R. 3199 and S. 3189. Both make permanent most of the expiring USA PATRIOT Act sections, occasionally in modified form. After amending two of the more controversial expiring sections, 206 (roving Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) wiretaps) and 215 (FISA tangible item access orders (business records-library records)), they postpone their expiration date, S. 1389 until December 31, 2009; H.R. 3199 until December 31, 2015. Both address questions raised as to the constitutionality of various “national security letter” (NSL) statutes by providing for review, enforcement, and exceptions to the attendant confidentiality requirements in more explicit terms. S. 1389 limits its NSL adjustments to the statute that affords federal foreign intelligence investigators access to communications records; H.R. 3199 amends the communications, and the financial institution and the credit bureau NSL statutes.
Back to Top of Screen