"Federal bills are increasingly complex, making them difficult to understand for the average
reader and the seasoned practitioner alike. What a congressional drafter understands to be the
import of a given provision could later be discussed and interpreted in committee or on the floor
of the House or the Senate. If the bill is enacted, federal agencies may then consider its meaning,
either behind the scenes when evaluating their own compliance with the law or through guidance,
rules, or agency orders governing third parties. If a litigant challenges an agency’s interpretation of the law, a court may need
to resolve the law’s meaning. Although the court’s ultimate goal is to effectuate Congress’s intent, judges may draw on
different philosophies or use different tools to arrive at their conclusions about what the law means.
A basic awareness of the rules and presumptions that apply when construing different components of a bill can help Members
and congressional staff identify potential issues with the help of legislative counsel when formulating legislation or avoid
interpretive pitfalls when reviewing bills proposed by other offices. For example:
Titles, headings, and general statements of purpose can help to elucidate the meaning of substantive
provisions in the bill, but they generally will not override the plain language of those provisions.
Formal legislative findings can show whether Congress may legislate in areas typically reserved for the
states or has identified harms sufficient to regulate speech or other constitutionally protected activities.
Defined terms in a bill set the meaning of those terms wherever those definitions apply, even if those terms
would normally have a different meaning in everyday usage.
Language that ostensibly creates rights may not help the intended beneficiaries without an explicit remedy,
just as prohibiting conduct may not curtail it without an enforcement mechanism.
If a bill potentially conflicts with an existing law, a reader may look to see if the bill would repeal the
existing law or otherwise address the potential conflict through an exception or a “notwithstanding” clause.
In the absence of such language, courts are instructed to try to harmonize the conflicting provisions instead
of assuming that Congress implicitly repealed the old law.
A preemption clause or non-preemption clause may indicate whether the bill displaces state laws on the
same subject. Without one, if the bill later becomes law, a court may have to decide whether Congress
implicitly preempted state law, presuming that it did not but asking, among other questions, whether it is
impossible to comply with both laws.
A severability clause may persuade a court not to strike down an entire law after concluding that a
particular provision in the legislation was unconstitutional.
Timing rules addressing when a provision takes effect or how long it remains in force override the usual
default rules that the provision takes effect upon enactment and remains in force until repealed or amended.
Beyond these considerations about the parts of a bill, it is useful to know how courts have interpreted common legislative
language.
For example:
The word “shall” generally introduces a requirement. While “may” can leave room for discretion, “may
not” signals a prohibition.
Words like “this Act” or “this section” can refer to different language, depending on whether they are used
“inside the quotes” in language amending an existing law, or “outside the quotes” as part of the stand-alone
bill text.
The phrase “notwithstanding any other provision of law” is susceptible to different interpretations
depending on the context.
The Supreme Court has advised lower courts to presume that “Congress says what it means and means what it says.” Thus,
unless a provision contains an obvious technical error, a court may give effect to clear, though seemingly unintended,
language rather than assume that the provision contains a drafting error..."
Federal Legislation
Showing posts with label federal_legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label federal_legislation. Show all posts
Thursday, September 30, 2021
Understanding Federal Legislation: A Section-by-Section Guide to Key Legal Considerations
Thursday, May 18, 2017
Cybersecurity: Legislation, Hearings, and Executive Branch Documents
"Cybersecurity vulnerabilities challenge governments, businesses, and individuals worldwide.
Attacks have been initiated against individuals, corporations, and countries. Targets have included
government networks, companies, and political organizations, depending upon whether the
attacker was seeking military intelligence, conducting diplomatic or industrial espionage,
engaging in cybercrime, or intimidating political activists. In addition, national borders mean
little or nothing to cyberattackers, and attributing an attack to a specific location can be difficult,
which may make responding problematic.
Despite many recommendations made over the past decade, most major legislative provisions relating to cybersecurity had been enacted prior to 2002. However, on December 18, 2014, five cybersecurity bills were signed by the President. These bills change federal cybersecurity programs in a number of ways:
codifying the role of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in developing a “voluntary, industry-led set of standards” to reduce cyber risk;
codifying the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS’s) National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center as a hub for interactions with the private sector;
updating the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) by requiring the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to “eliminate ... inefficient and wasteful reports”; and
requiring DHS to develop a “comprehensive workforce strategy” within a year and giving DHS new authorities for cybersecurity hiring..."
Cybersecurity
Despite many recommendations made over the past decade, most major legislative provisions relating to cybersecurity had been enacted prior to 2002. However, on December 18, 2014, five cybersecurity bills were signed by the President. These bills change federal cybersecurity programs in a number of ways:
codifying the role of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in developing a “voluntary, industry-led set of standards” to reduce cyber risk;
codifying the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS’s) National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center as a hub for interactions with the private sector;
updating the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) by requiring the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to “eliminate ... inefficient and wasteful reports”; and
requiring DHS to develop a “comprehensive workforce strategy” within a year and giving DHS new authorities for cybersecurity hiring..."
Cybersecurity
Labels:
CRS,
cybersecurity,
federal_departments,
federal_legislation
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Legislative Research for Congressional Staff: How to Find Documents and Other Resources
"This report is one of a series of reports on legislative process and research; it is intended to serve as a finding aid to sources of information, such as documents, news articles, analysis, contacts and services, used in legislative research. It does not define or describe the purpose of various government documents; that information can be found in companion CRS Report R41865, Legislative History Research: A Guide to Resources for Congressional Staff , and CRS Report
RL33895, Researching Current Federal Legislation and Regulations: A Guide to Resources for Congressional Staff..."
Legislative ResearchWednesday, September 5, 2012
Researching Current Federal Legislation and Regulations: A Guide to Resources for Congressional Staff
"This report is designed to introduce congressional staff to selected governmental and
nongovernmental sources that are useful in tracking and obtaining information federal legislation
and regulations. It includes governmental sources such as the Legislative Information System
(LIS), THOMAS, the Government Printing Office’s Federal Digital System (FDsys), and U.S.
Senate and House websites. Nongovernmental or commercial sources include resources such as
HeinOnline and the Congressional Quarterly (CQ) websites. It also highlights classes offered by
the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and the Library of Congress Law Library..."
nongovernmental sources that are useful in tracking and obtaining information federal legislation
and regulations. It includes governmental sources such as the Legislative Information System
(LIS), THOMAS, the Government Printing Office’s Federal Digital System (FDsys), and U.S.
Senate and House websites. Nongovernmental or commercial sources include resources such as
HeinOnline and the Congressional Quarterly (CQ) websites. It also highlights classes offered by
the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and the Library of Congress Law Library..."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)