executive order

Albeit delay, I am privileged to present to all our dear readers the 20th issue of our flagship journal titled National Capital Law Journal ('NCLJ' in short), published by Law Centre-II. Throughout its publication journey, this journal has been widely acclaimed by the readers, mostly scholars, practitioners, and students of law in our country. At the time when this journal was first published in 1996, it was second only to Delhi Law Review, a publication from the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. At that time, there was a dearth of quality journals in the national capital region. So much water has flown down after that time and there is abundance of many journals and law reports in this region. However, the NCLJ has remained as the trusted source of reference for the members of academia and practitioners of law all over the country and abroad even today. Research articles submitted for publication in this journal are blindly peer-reviewed and matched with its aims and scope. The editor-in-Chief and the entire Editorial Board of this journal are very experienced and driven by the motto of excellence. The journal is published both in online and print formats. The present volume has selected eleven long and short articles on contemporary topics, such as abortion rights, insolvency protocols, gender and climate change, child protection laws, criminal procedure, equality principle, law on occupied territory, powers of the President in the times of political instability, internal displacement induced by climate change, powers of President of Nigeria, and the scope for paperless judiciary. In addition, an attractive section, i.e., book review, adds another feather in the cap of this journal as it has selected one book on IPR and Bio-technology for it. I take this opportunity to congratulate the entire editorial team for selecting the best articles and bringing out this issue with strict adherence to the highest standards of scholarly editing. I wish Professor Pinki Sharma, the editor, and her editorial team a huge success in broadening the base of readers of this flagship journal by sharing and tagging the journal to their social media profile and by such other electronic means. Last but not the least, the advisory board of this journal deserves kudos for their support and blessings for the journal. It gives us enormous pleasure to present the latest issue of the National Capital Law Journal Vol XX, which endures our obligation to nurturing laborious academic review and critical rendezvous with contemporary legal issues. This issue brings together a miscellaneous assortment of contributions from academicians, research scholars and practitioners offering both doctrinal scrutinises and interdisciplinary perspectives. Research articles in journals are not just theoretical exercises, but they are vehicles for knowledge conception and scholarly communications. Research articles published in journals are the foundation of academic discourse, intellectual growth and are a key mechanism for disseminating such results. They provide a professional means of expressing ideas, illustrating credentials, and contributing to the overall knowledge base. They safeguard that innovative ideas, critical evaluation, and empirical verdicts are shared with the widespread scholarly community. Amidst the fast-paced growth, research methodologies are in a constant state of evolution, punctuating the dynamic character of quest and exploration. The process of blind peer review adds credibility and preserves the integrity of research.

Welcome to this afternoon's session: The Court and the Changing Constitution: A discussion. By discussion we mean something more akin to a free-for-all. We have various different topics here: we have appointments, we have separation of powers, we have disincorporation (I have no idea what that might be), and we have the exclusionary rule. And among the common denominators I see here are complaints about court of appeals' jurisprudence and complaints about all kinds of stuff, even complaints about one another. I just told Professor Carl Swidorskil at the break that his dissertation on the court of appeals' appointment process, the changeover from elections to the so-called merit selection system, was the first I had ever read. So, Carl, go to it.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

Understanding and controlling the reasoning processes of large language models (LLMs) is crucial for their reliable deployment. In this work, we investigate the latent representation of selfevaluation behavior-the ability of a model to assess its own reasoning steps-a vital behavior for robust reasoning. Through targeted steering vector computation, we identify a direction within LLM activations that represents this selfevaluation behavior. Crucially, we demonstrate that this steering vector for self-evaluation exhibits remarkable cross-contextual efficacy, working well across different domains (e.g., math and medicine) and languages (e.g., English and Spanish). This suggests that the identified latent direction captures a fundamental, abstract representation of self-evaluation within the LLM's internal state, offering a promising avenue for interpretable and controllable reasoning across diverse applications.

In order to best identify potential future leaders within the organization, a company needs to find a way to measure the qualities of executive presence both to ensure that all of the company’s leadership values are being truly expressed in everyday actions and to increase the effectiveness of succession planning among the organization’s upper-tier executives.

As we fully onboard Cloud One, DTIC will leverage high availability network connections, efficient downloads, on-demand compute and storage to execute machine learning (ML) driven analytics and visualizations, and commercial user tools. Fully integrated Service submission pipelines provide DTIC with the ability to notify Services of missing content as well as usage/reference statistics available to report to authors/submitters/senior leaders. AI-augmented commercial search will analyze user activity and provide recommendations and ML-driven interrogation of DTIC collections will discover insights not readily apparent using current analysis techniques.

This work evaluates the performance of Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) extraction methods in identifying attack techniques from threat reports available on the web using the MITRE ATT&CK framework. We analyse four configurations utilising state-of-theart tools, including the Threat Report ATT&CK Mapper (TRAM) and open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) such as Llama2. Our findings reveal significant challenges, including class imbalance, overfitting, and domain-specific complexity, which impede accurate technique extraction. To mitigate these issues, we propose a novel two-step pipeline: first, an LLM summarises the reports, and second, a retrained SciBERT model processes a rebalanced dataset augmented with LLM-generated data. This approach achieves an improvement in F1-scores compared to baseline models, with several attack techniques surpassing an F1-score of 0.90. Our contributions enhance the efficiency of web-based CTI systems and support collaborative cybersecurity operations in an interconnected digital landscape, paving the way for future research on integrating human-AI collaboration platforms. CCS Concepts • Security and privacy → Usability in security and privacy; • Information systems → Summarization.

In its foreign policy, the US purports to found its actions on a "rules-based order". What exactly comprises a rules-based world order is a matter of debate, but it must be founded on rules, which have certain properties. These properties arise from both the logic of rules and are to be found in legal decisions which consider the exercise of executive discretion. President Obama's foreign policy executive orders in regard to Crimea "the Executive Orders" could not be described as being founded on a rules-based order and are profoundly at odds with classic US jurisprudence. However, modern US jurisprudence is itself in retreat from its constitutional high ground, despite formally acknowledging principles which underlie earlier decisions.

Venezuela es un país con un alto potencial en recursos minerales, vislumbrado actualmente como una oportunidad alternativa de desarrollo económico por el Ejecutivo Nacional para atraer inversión extranjera, dada la caída abrumadora de los precios del petróleo como principal fuente de divisas para cubrir el gasto público, entre otras inversiones. En miras de lograr un desarrollo sustentable, de acuerdo a los postulados emanados en la Constitución de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela (1999), la implementación de la actividad minera debe acogerse a la legislación ambiental vigente, en virtud de potenciar los impactos positivos, y reducir, controlar y mitigar los impactos negativos que se deriven de la misma. En este sentido, se realiza un análisis al marco jurídico venezolano para comprender los alcances del derecho ambiental venezolano, su trascendencia, retos e implicaciones en la gestión ambiental de la exploración y explotación de minerales en el contexto nacional como activida...

Contributors AS and Ir were responsible for the study design. All authors were responsible to conduct the study and data collection. Ir and AS ran the data analysis and interpreted data. Ir and AS wrote the manuscript and all authors read the paper and contributed to discussion.

Do you know your preferred employment outcome? Many of you reading this editorial may not have a disability, but if you do and you qualify to receive employment services, your options are being limited as you read this because of a policy known as Employment First. This approach sets “community-based, integrated employment – which pays at least the minimum wage – [as] the first option for employment services for youth and adults with significant disabilities” (Scaglione, 2015). Employment First is a federal policy that has been adopted in many states, and is currently being set in New York State after Governor Cuomo issued an Executive Order establishing an Employment First policy commission in September 2014 (Executive Order No. 136, 2014). To understand how this policy has come about, it is crucial that we understand its origins in the evolving definition of inclusion.

The June 2025 military deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles was an unprecedented response to protests against ICE immigration raids. President Trump justified the action as a defense against an "invasion" of "undocumented immigrants and criminals," federalizing the National Guard without the consent of California Governor Gavin Newsom, something unseen in 60 years. This measure sparked a constitutional crisis, with Newsom filing lawsuits alleging violation of state sovereignty and the Posse Comitatus Act. The action is part of Trump's authoritarian strategies, such as "Flooding the Zone" to overwhelm the opposition, and "Project 2025," which seeks a radical restructuring of executive power with mass deportations and the use of force against protesters. The deployment occurred in a context of economic (tariffs) and diplomatic (war in Ukraine) failures, suggesting a "hunt for immigrants" to divert attention and test the institutional and social resilience of American democracy to the planned advance of an authoritarian system. The legal and social resistance underscores democratic resilience to these tactics.

Prohibiting Neo-colonialism.

Head of State Document by the Executive Office of the Head of State on 14/06/2025.

This Executive Order is amended, enacted and promulgated to counter the terrorist actions of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Crown and the Black Hand.

In January 2017, a seven-country ban blocked immigrants from entering the U.S. When the story broke, many people posted comments on online news sites. Analysis revealed themes of rejection and acceptance. Rejection themes focused on security, demeaning Muslims, and exclusion. Acceptance themes called for inclusivity and providing a safe haven for immigrants. Comments aligned into partisan camps reflecting political branding of the sites. Analyses revealed both pro-ban and anti-ban emotionally charged comments. Hate speech was used to justify support of the ban on ultra-conservative sites. These analyses described the emotional response to admitting Muslim immigrants into the United States.

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) accelerates its integration across global economies, critical infrastructure, and daily life, the demand for effective governance has intensified. Global AI Regulations and National Strategies (2024–2025) provides a comprehensive, jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction analysis of the latest AI policy developments, regulatory frameworks, and strategic initiatives from major world powers, including the European Union, United States, China, United Kingdom, Japan, and others. The whitepaper examines how governments are balancing innovation with risk, with divergent approaches reflecting differing legal traditions, geopolitical priorities, and ethical frameworks. Key regulatory models—ranging from the EU’s risk-tiered mandatory AI Act, the U.S.’s voluntary standards via Executive Order 14110 and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, to China’s state-centric rules on generative AI—are assessed in detail.

The analysis highlights converging global norms on transparency, fairness, and human oversight, while also underscoring variances in enforcement mechanisms and sector-specific focus areas. The report includes a comparative policy matrix, identifies emerging trends such as international cooperation and private-sector codes of conduct, and evaluates the strategic implications for AI developers, cybersecurity firms, and multinational enterprises. Designed as a strategic policy digest, this document offers an up-to-date reference point for policymakers, corporate strategists, and technology leaders navigating the rapidly evolving AI governance landscape as of Q2 2025.

Taking Steps To Address The National Emergency With Respect To Assassination Conspiracies That Threaten Earth.

A Head of State Document by the Executive Office of the Head of State of Earth on 12/05/2025.

This Executive Order is enacted and promulgated to foil assassination conspiracies, particularly by the Black Hand organisation, throughout Earth's territory.

Taking Steps To Address The National Emergency With Respect To Illegally Controlled Property And Assets.

A Head of State Document by the Executive Office of the Head of State of Earth on 08/05/2025.

This Executive Order is enacted and promulgated to improve social and economic conditions throughout Earth's territory.

Taking Steps To Address The National Emergency With Respect To Supremacist Tendencies That Threaten Earth.

Head of State Document by the Executive Office of the Head of State of Earth on 26/04/2025.

This Executive Order is enacted and promulgated to address and combat supremacism upon Earth's territory.

Contributors AS and Ir were responsible for the study design. All authors were responsible to conduct the study and data collection. Ir and AS ran the data analysis and interpreted data. Ir and AS wrote the manuscript and all authors read the paper and contributed to discussion.

Taking Steps To Address the National Emergency With Respect to Significant Malicious Financial Activities.

A Head of State Document by the Executive Office of the Head of State of Great Britain on 07/04/2025.

This Executive Order is enacted and promulgated to improve economic conditions throughout Great Britain's territory.

The mission of the U.S. Department of Energy's Federal Energy Management Pro=-(FEMP) is to reduce the cost of Government by advancing energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of solar and other renewable technologies. This is accomplished by creating partnerships, leveraging resources, transferring technology, and providing trainiqg and technical guidance and assistance to agencies. Each of these activities is directly related to achieving the requirements set forth in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and the goals that have been established in Executive Order 13123 (June 1999), as well as supporting activities that promote sound management of Federal financial and personnel resources. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) supports the FEMP mission in all activity areas. This document provides findings and recommendations that resulted from an assessment of the Brookhaven National Laboratory by a team from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to assess the site's potential for various alternative financing options as a means to implement energyefflciency improvements. The assessment looked for life-cycle cost-effective ener=~-efficiency improvement opportunities,. and through a series of staff interviews, evaluated the various methods by which these opportunities maybe financed, while-considering availability of finds, staff, and available financing options. This report summarizes the findings of the visit and the resulting recommendations.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

Bureaucracy placated with discriminatory motives has left refugees in limbo. It is sad that we will probably look back in twenty years and say we should have done more, and we could have done more. Hindsight is 20/20, but it is not an excuse many can understand when we have been here before at the brink of World War II. It is a new day, perhaps a new age, but the same hateful political rhetoric has just been repackaged. With the largest global refugee crisis in history, the value of all human lives must be our priority.

The COVID-19 pandemic put an unprecedented strain on the nursing workforce. In response, many states issued executive orders waiving licensure requirements for their state if nurses have a license in good standing in another state. However, such efforts were not without risk. For example, a nurse who was working in a state under an executive order was terminated by the employer after the nurse was found diverting controlled substances and diluting vials of controlled substances with normal saline. This case study highlights the importance of the authority provisions granted in the Nurse Licensure Compact and the risk to public protection that can potentially result when executive orders waive the requirement for an in-state nursing license.

The COVID-19 pandemic put an unprecedented strain on the nursing workforce. In response, many states issued executive orders waiving licensure requirements for their state if nurses have a license in good standing in another state. However, such efforts were not without risk. For example, a nurse who was working in a state under an executive order was terminated by the employer after the nurse was found diverting controlled substances and diluting vials of controlled substances with normal saline. This case study highlights the importance of the authority provisions granted in the Nurse Licensure Compact and the risk to public protection that can potentially result when executive orders waive the requirement for an in-state nursing license.

AI is a new tool with only limited regulation. One such attempt is the Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence from October 30, 2023, issued by the US President. As AI may be regulated from various angles, one of them is its influence on cybersecurity. AI Executive Order is much more concentrated on cybersecurity issues than other regulations or recommendations related to AI, like those issued in China, drafted in the EU or issued by international organisations like OECD and UNESCO. However, the strong focus on cybersecurity in the AI Executive Order is in line with the National Cybersecurity Strategy issued by the same US administration in March 2023.

Pretrained language models underpin several AI applications, but their high computational cost for training limits accessibility. Initiatives such as BLOOM and StarCoder aim to democratize access to pretrained models for collaborative community development. However, such existing models * Equal contribution † Equal mentoring

This article presents a novel argument about what enables democracies to survive when executives attempt to weaken institutional constraints. We argue that democracies erode because (1) an illiberal executive attempts to undermine democracy and (2) this executive commands a majority in the national legislature. Democracies survive if the executive is not deeply illiberal or if the opposition controls a majority of the national legislature. The empirical section presents data about executive illiberalism and the balance of power in the national legislature for thirteen Latin American presidents. We test our argument in four negative cases (episodes) in Argentina since 1983. We use primary sources including 125 original interviews to explain how two presidents who attempted to centralize power fell short of eroding democracy

During adolescence, hot and cold executive functions are still developing, making it essential to assess and intervene if changes occur. The present study aims to identify, through a systematic review, which interventions in executive functions have been studied in typical adolescents, including hot and cold executive functions, seeking to determine the effects of these interventions in this segment. The search was conducted according to the PRISMA method in the PubMed database. Of the 315 articles initially located, five remained after applying exclusion criteria and analyzing by judges. The selected articles revealed a more significant effect of interventions on cold executive functions than hot ones, which may corroborate previous data suggesting that hot executive functions take longer to be stimulated than cold ones. Only one of the five articles jointly stimulated cold and hot executive functions, which reveals the need for more research in the area. The small number of articl...

This article has three sections, each of which deals with an Executive Order. The first section, "Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Past," emphasizes the critical role that Executive Orders played in the formation of OIRA. More specifically, OIRA owes its initial existence to the establishment of a centralized regulatory review system, the Quality of Life Review, which initiated Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review of environmental regulations through the issuance of a directive from OMB. Every subsequent President expanded OMBs powers through the issuance of Executive Orders which culminated in the Iconic Executive Order 12291. The section concludes with the recommendation that a select class of Executive Orders, and OMB Directives, be designated as "Iconic" by the National Archivist in consultation with the OIRA, and then given substantial deference by incoming Administrations. The second section, "OIRA Present," describes an Executive Order issued during the Kennedy Administration which remains in effect but was promulgated prior to the establishment of OIRA and therefore recommends that a new Executive Order be issued which gives OIRA specific authority to participate in the conduct of interagency reviews of Executive Orders. The third section, "OIRA Future," describes an Executive Order which implements a regulatory budget (RB) and institutionalizes a mechanism for controlling the size of the administrative state. This final section of the article recommends that the aforementioned Executive Order be reviewed and modified based upon the outcome of a request for public comments, and rules with demonstrated positive net benefits should no longer be accorded an automatic entitlement for issuance as a final rule absent their inclusion in an RB.

An Ohio Executive Order forced adult day service providers across the state to close from March 24, 2020 until September 21, 2020 due to COVID, resulting in significant hardship for providers and families. In fact, 65% of programs reported laying off or reducing staff and 83% of directors reported participants had to move to higher and more expensive levels of care such as nursing homes and assisted living. Programs reported that 74% of caregivers had to choose between working and taking care of their family members. Ninety-one percent of ADS program directors in Ohio reported their caregivers were experiencing an increase in stress and anxiety. This paper explores the experiences of Ohio adult day providers during the COVID epidemic, and identifies the challenges and opportunities to coalition building to educate policy makers about day services and the crucial care centers provide.

Since 2017 the Trump Administration has passed a series of Executive Actions targeting the United States Refugee Admissions Program, seeking to ban groups of refugees the Administration deems to be a national security threat. In addition President Trump has exercised his authority to reduce the annual cap on the number of refugees entering the country. This article explains how the refugee resettlement system is impacted by these actions, finding that the relationship between the federal government and the nonprofit agencies engaged in resettlement has fundamentally changed and that the very survival of the resettlement sector is at risk.

I. INTRODUCTION Amidst nationwide protests calling for racial justice after the killing of George Floyd over the summer of 2020, President Donald Trump deployed federal troops to several cities across the country, including Portland, Oregon. The legal basis for sending the troops was to protect federal property, and relied upon the powers of the Department of Homeland Security and an executive order from the summer. However, President Trump's rhetoric surrounding the deployment suggested that they were truly sent into cities to serve as domestic law enforcement and quell the protests. And as the troops' presence lengthened and increased in Portland, reports of kidnapping and tossing protestors into unmarked vans and targeting journalists and legal observers with munitions began to surface while officials and experts questioned the legality of Trump's actions. Ultimately, President Donald Trump legally deployed federal troops to the city of Portland during summer 2020. However, once they arrived in the city, they began to engage in illegal and unconstitutional behavior that plainly violated the 10th Amendment and the basic American principle of federalism, as well as the 1st and 4th Amendment rights of protesters, journalists and legal observers. Local, state, and national leadership denounced the presence of the federal troops in Portland, and multiple lawsuits have been filed in response, some of which are still pending. This analysis will delve into the background of the protests and deployment of federal troops and discuss the legal issues at hand in determining the legality and constitutionality of President Trump's actions. It will include reactions from political leaders, as well as several lawsuits that have claimed violations of 1st, 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendment rights of Portlanders. Finally, it will end with a legal analysis and conclusion of whether Trump's act of deploying federal officers to Portland was legal. Tebor 2 II. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF PORTLAND PROTESTS George Floyd was a 46-year-old Black man who died at the hands of police in Minneapolis, Minnesota on May 25, 2020. The officer who killed Floyd held his knee against Floyd's neck for over eight minutes as Floyd repeatedly pleaded "I can't breathe," video evidence shows. 1 Floyd's death sparked nationwide protests calling for justice and an end to police brutality against Black Americans. These protests came alongside the larger Black Lives Matter movement which has existed for years prior to Floyd's death. Many dispute the exact timeline of when protests over Floyd's death began in Portland, but the general consensus is that they began over Labor Day weekend in 2020. Thousands came out to the streets to protest in the days following Floyd's death. Many protestors were peaceful. Some were not. While Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler, who serves as police commissioner of the city, was criticized for law enforcement's response to the protests, often deploying tear gas and less-lethal munitions, President Donald Trump believed Wheeler was not doing enough to quell protests. 2 Trump had previously used federal forces to disperse a protest in front of the White House in Washington, D.C. in June 2020. 3 And similarly to Portland, Trump deployed federal troops to Chicago and said he had plans to send more to New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and other urban centers in July. 4 After protests stretched for over a month straight on a nightly basis, Trump signed an executive order on June 26, 2020 allowing for the deployment of Department of Homeland Security officers in order to protect federal property in cities across the nation, including

I. INTRODUCTION Amidst nationwide protests calling for racial justice after the killing of George Floyd over the summer of 2020, President Donald Trump deployed federal troops to several cities across the country, including Portland, Oregon. The legal basis for sending the troops was to protect federal property, and relied upon the powers of the Department of Homeland Security and an executive order from the summer. However, President Trump's rhetoric surrounding the deployment suggested that they were truly sent into cities to serve as domestic law enforcement and quell the protests. And as the troops' presence lengthened and increased in Portland, reports of kidnapping and tossing protestors into unmarked vans and targeting journalists and legal observers with munitions began to surface while officials and experts questioned the legality of Trump's actions. Ultimately, President Donald Trump legally deployed federal troops to the city of Portland during summer 2020. However, once they arrived in the city, they began to engage in illegal and unconstitutional behavior that plainly violated the 10th Amendment and the basic American principle of federalism, as well as the 1st and 4th Amendment rights of protesters, journalists and legal observers. Local, state, and national leadership denounced the presence of the federal troops in Portland, and multiple lawsuits have been filed in response, some of which are still pending. This analysis will delve into the background of the protests and deployment of federal troops and discuss the legal issues at hand in determining the legality and constitutionality of President Trump's actions. It will include reactions from political leaders, as well as several lawsuits that have claimed violations of 1st, 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendment rights of Portlanders. Finally, it will end with a legal analysis and conclusion of whether Trump's act of deploying federal officers to Portland was legal. Tebor 2 II. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF PORTLAND PROTESTS George Floyd was a 46-year-old Black man who died at the hands of police in Minneapolis, Minnesota on May 25, 2020. The officer who killed Floyd held his knee against Floyd's neck for over eight minutes as Floyd repeatedly pleaded "I can't breathe," video evidence shows. 1 Floyd's death sparked nationwide protests calling for justice and an end to police brutality against Black Americans. These protests came alongside the larger Black Lives Matter movement which has existed for years prior to Floyd's death. Many dispute the exact timeline of when protests over Floyd's death began in Portland, but the general consensus is that they began over Labor Day weekend in 2020. Thousands came out to the streets to protest in the days following Floyd's death. Many protestors were peaceful. Some were not. While Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler, who serves as police commissioner of the city, was criticized for law enforcement's response to the protests, often deploying tear gas and less-lethal munitions, President Donald Trump believed Wheeler was not doing enough to quell protests. 2 Trump had previously used federal forces to disperse a protest in front of the White House in Washington, D.C. in June 2020. 3 And similarly to Portland, Trump deployed federal troops to Chicago and said he had plans to send more to New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and other urban centers in July. 4 After protests stretched for over a month straight on a nightly basis, Trump signed an executive order on June 26, 2020 allowing for the deployment of Department of Homeland Security officers in order to protect federal property in cities across the nation, including

This report presents information developed from a workshop on the Inclusion of Language Minority Populations in National Studies (Bethesda, MD, July 17-28, 2000). To help find ways for survey research to capture the increasing linguistic. diversity of the United States and thus be truly representative, this report focuses on current barriers to inclusion as well as ways to enable inclusion. Cost is the most significant barrier to including language-minority populations in national studies because of the costs of sampling and obtaining and using bilingual research personnel. Geographic distribution, language change over time, lack of coherence with research goals, and the use of community members as translators and interpreters are

Afew years ago when I was conducting field hearings to discuss intergovernmental relations (state, federal, and tribal) in the education of American Indians/Alaska Natives connected to President Clinton’s Executive Order on American Indian and Alaska Native Education, a hearing was held in Arizona at Window Rock, capitol of the Navajo Nation. During a morning break from our discussions, I felt a tug upon my sleeve that beckoned me to turn around. At the other end of the tug was an older Navajo man who asked me if I wanted to know what the problem with Indian education was. I said, “Yes,

Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

We have also proposed abolishing almost 500 Federal advisory and other commissions and boards.. .. I know that the American people are still sick and tired of Federal paperwork and redtape. Bit by bit we are chopping down the thicket of unnecessary Federal regulations by which Government too often interferes in our personal business. We've cut the public's Federal paperwork load by more than 12 percent in less than a year. And we are not through cutting. President Carter, The State of the Union Address 14 Pres. Documents 90, 94 (Jan. 23, 1978, No. 3) L ast winter, President Carter-in a fireside chat from the White House-assured his listening and viewing audience that, "We will cut down on Government regulations.., and we will make sure that those that are written are in plain English for a change."' On March 23, 1978, he signed Executive Order 12044 entitled, "Improving Government Regulations" which was designed to stoke the fires of his earlier chat 2 and thereby make "Federal regulations clearer, less burdensome, and more cost-effective," 3 and written in such a plain English

While announcing his participation in 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump promised, if elected, to build a wall along the US-Mexican border to limit the flow of illegal immigrants from Latin America to the United States. During the campaign, he repeatedly stressed the necessity to control the situation at the border, which he indicated as one of the biggest threats for US national security, claiming that Mexico should pay for the construction of the wall. After winning the election, President Trump decided to fulfill his promise and signed an executive order enabling the wall to be erected. During four years of his tenure, the wall was built in almost half of the planned length It had impact not only on the flow of immigrants from Latin America, but also on the debate about U.S. immigration policy, as well as on the bilateral relations with Mexico. The purpose of the article is to analyze political consequences of putting up the wall, both in the US and Mexico, and to assess the impact of Trump's immigration policy on the relations between both countries.

The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. vii

Venezuela es un país con un alto potencial en recursos minerales, vislumbrado actualmente como una oportunidad alternativa de desarrollo económico por el Ejecutivo Nacional para atraer inversión extranjera, dada la caída abrumadora de los precios del petróleo como principal fuente de divisas para cubrir el gasto público, entre otras inversiones. En miras de lograr un desarrollo sustentable, de acuerdo a los postulados emanados en la Constitución de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela (1999), la implementación de la actividad minera debe acogerse a la legislación ambiental vigente, en virtud de potenciar los impactos positivos, y reducir, controlar y mitigar los impactos negativos que se deriven de la misma. En este sentido, se realiza un análisis al marco jurídico venezolano para comprender los alcances del derecho ambiental venezolano, su trascendencia, retos e implicaciones en la gestión ambiental de la exploración y explotación de minerales en el contexto nacional como activida...