Threading Between the Religion Clauses

A careful review of the overall record suggests that Pres Clinton\u27s Administration has been more solicitous of the First Amendment\u27s Religious Clauses as a whole than can normally be expected of elected national officials and their appointees

Government Partnerships With Faith-based Service Providers: The State of the Law

Rapid change and significant uncertainty are the most noteworthy features of the legal environment for participation by faith-based organizations ("FBOs") in government-financed socialservices. Developments in federal constitutional law, statutorily based federal programs, and the administrative environment have altered the legal circumstances in which such opportunities mayappear. In addition, the body of law (federal, state, and local) concerning the employment relation, an emerging focus on state constitutional law, and the existing pattern of contractual relations between government entities and FBOs, contribute to an atmosphere of legal complexity surrounding this field. These patterns of change and uncertainty play a crucial role in the decisions of FBOs on the value and risks involved in participating in such programs, as well as in decisions by government agencies concerning whether and how to undertake such programs.The topics included are 1) the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. constitution, including recent cases involving the application of that Clause to FBOs in service partnerships with government; 2) state constitutional law as a source of impediments to state relationships with FBOs, and federal constitutional challenges to such impediments; 3) the law of employment discrimination – federal, state, and local – as it applies to FBOs in such partnerships; 4) federal programs that explicitly invite participation by FBOs; and 5) state social service contracts with FBOs, and the presence or absence of religionspecific provisions in such contracts

Using Event Calculus to Formalise Policy Specification and Analysis

As the interest in using policy-based approaches for systems management grows, it is becoming increasingly important to develop methods for performing analysis and refinement of policy specifications. Although this is an area that researchers have devoted some attention to, none of the proposed solutions address the issues of analysing specifications that combine authorisation and management policies; analysing policy specifications that contain constraints on the applicability of the policies; and performing a priori analysis of the specification that will both detect the presence of inconsistencies and explain the situations in which the conflict will occur. We present a method for transforming both policy and system behaviour specifications into a formal notation that is based on event calculus. Additionally it describes how this formalism can be used in conjunction with abductive reasoning techniques to perform a priori analysis of policy specifications for the various conflict types identified in the literature. Finally, it presents some initial thoughts on how this notation and analysis technique could be used to perform policy refinement

An Argumentation-Based Reasoner to Assist Digital Investigation and Attribution of Cyber-Attacks

We expect an increase in the frequency and severity of cyber-attacks that comes along with the need for efficient security countermeasures. The process of attributing a cyber-attack helps to construct efficient and targeted mitigating and preventive security measures. In this work, we propose an argumentation-based reasoner (ABR) as a proof-of-concept tool that can help a forensics analyst during the analysis of forensic evidence and the attribution process. Given the evidence collected from a cyber-attack, our reasoner can assist the analyst during the investigation process, by helping him/her to analyze the evidence and identify who performed the attack. Furthermore, it suggests to the analyst where to focus further analyses by giving hints of the missing evidence or new investigation paths to follow. ABR is the first automatic reasoner that can combine both technical and social evidence in the analysis of a cyber-attack, and that can also cope with incomplete and conflicting information. To illustrate how ABR can assist in the analysis and attribution of cyber-attacks we have used examples of cyber-attacks and their analyses as reported in publicly available reports and online literature. We do not mean to either agree or disagree with the analyses presented therein or reach attribution conclusions