The 108th Congress has considered and is considering legislation on a wide range ofimmigration issues. Two of these issues -- the transfer of immigration authorities and expeditednaturalization through military service -- relate directly to post-September 11, 2001 U.S. efforts toimprove national security. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, the 107th Congress establisheda new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ( P.L.107-296 ). DHS was tasked with preventing terrorist attacks in the United States and reducing thenation's vulnerability to terrorism, among other responsibilities. Effective March 1, 2003, P.L.107-296 abolished the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) of the Department of Justice(DOJ), the agency which had administered and enforced the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), (1) and transferred most immigration-related functions to the newly created DHS. Lingering questionsremain, however, about the division of authorities between DOJ and DHS in some areas. Pendinglegislation would amend the INA to explicitly transfer certain authorities to DHS. Like theestablishment of DHS, Operation Iraqi Freedom had a goal of protecting U.S. national security. Thisoperation prompted congressional interest in legislation to expand the citizenship benefits of aliensserving in the military. The 108th Congress has enacted a measure ( P.L. 108-136 ) that amendsmilitary naturalization and posthumous citizenship statutes and provides immigration benefits forimmediate relatives of U.S. citizen servicemembers who die as a result of actual combat service. The 108th Congress is currently debating legislation that would implement recommendations of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11Commission). The 9/11 Commission's immigration-related recommendations focused primarily ontargeting terrorist travel through an intelligence and security strategy based on reliable identificationsystems and effective, integrated information-sharing. As Congress has considered theserecommendations, however, possible legislative responses have broadened to include significant andpossibly far-reaching changes in the substantive law governing immigration and how that law isenforced, both at the border and in the interior of the United States. Other measures before the 108th Congress -- such as those on temporary workers and business personnel, adjustment of status for unauthorized aliens, and noncitizen eligibility for public benefits-- concern more perennial immigration-related questions. These include how to use the immigrationsystem to meet U.S. labor needs, how to address unauthorized immigration to the United States, andwhat types of benefits to provide to noncitizens. Of course, today's heightened security concernshave likewise added new dimensions to these old questions. In the current debate over consularidentification cards, for example, issues of unauthorized immigration and security have been raised. This report discusses these and other immigration-related issues that have seen legislative action orare of significant congressional interest. (2) The finalsection of the report lists enacted legislation andselected bills receiving action. For decades, the administrative authority to interpret, implement, enforce, and adjudicateimmigration law within the United States lay almost exclusively with one officer: the AttorneyGeneral. The most general statement of this power was found in ï¿½103(a)(1) of the INA, thefundamental statute regulating the entry and stay of aliens. With some exceptions, immigrationfunctions were delegated to INS, which was headed by a Commissioner who reported to the AttorneyGeneral. On March 1, 2003, primary responsibility for securing our borders and managing the immigration process shifted to DHS. This transfer was effectuated through general language in theHomeland Security Act (HSA; P.L. 107-296 ): Congress did not amend every affected section of theINA to change all references to the Attorney General that were effectively superceded by the generaltransfer of authority. However, Congress did amend the language of ï¿½103(a) of the INA, first inï¿½1102 of the HSA and later in Division L, ï¿½105, of the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution of2003 ( P.L. 108-7 ). This section now states: The Secretary of Homeland Security shall be charged with the administration and enforcement of [the INA] and all other laws relating to the immigrationand naturalization of aliens, except insofar as this chapter or such laws relate to the powers,functions, and duties conferred upon the President, Attorney General, the Secretary of State .... Provided, however , That determination and ruling by the Attorney General with respect to allquestions of law shall be controlling. The revised language reflects the transfer of general authority, but may leave certain issues unresolved. First, exactly what immigration powers and functions are to be retained by the AttorneyGeneral? Laws to date make clear that the Attorney General is to remain responsible foradministrative adjudications by immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals, and thatdeterminations and rulings by the Attorney General on questions of law are to be controlling. However, the intended extent of these and possible other retained powers may not be altogether clearat the operational level. Second, to the degree that authority over immigration is now fragmentedor overlapping, how are the respective authorities of DHS and the Attorney General to becoordinated and reconciled? It has been argued that only a section-by-section revision of the INA, replacing references to the Attorney General with references to the Secretary of Homeland Security where appropriate, willtruly clarify the allocation of authorities between the two departments. (3) A bill to replace certain INAreferences to the Attorney General with references to the Secretary of Homeland Security( H.R. 1416 ) was adopted by the House on June 24, 2003, and reported by the SenateGovernmental Affairs Committee on November 25, 2003. As passed by the House and reported bythe Senate Committee, this bill, the "Homeland Security Technical Corrections Act of 2003," wouldremove specified references to the Attorney General, INS, and the INS Commissioner in INA ï¿½103(leaving intact the controlling nature of the Attorney General's determinations of law) and in INAï¿½287(g), which concerns acceptance of state services to carry out immigration enforcement. According to the House Select Committee on Homeland Security report on H.R. 1416 ( H.Rept. 108-104 ), the bill "improves the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and honors the originalintentions of the drafters by making grammatical and technical corrections." Nonetheless, questionsmay remain as to how far this provision would fully clarify and resolve outstanding issues ofauthority. (4) Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003 there has been considerableinterest in legislation to expand the citizenship benefits of aliens serving in the military. Thereported deaths in action of noncitizen soldiers have drawn attention to provisions of the INA thatgrant posthumous citizenship to those who die as a result of active-duty service during a period ofhostilities. The INA also provides for expedited naturalization for noncitizens serving in the UnitedStates military. During peacetime, noncitizens in the military may petition to naturalize after threeyears aggregate military service rather than the requisite five years of legal permanent residence. During periods of military hostilities, noncitizens serving in the armed forces can naturalizeimmediately. In the wake of September 11, 2001, and the war against terrorism, President George W. Bush officially designated the period beginning on September 11, 2001, as a "period of hostilities," whichtriggered immediate naturalization eligibility for active-duty U.S. military servicemembers. At thetime of the designation (July 3, 2002), the Department of Defense and the former INS announcedthat they would work together to ensure that military naturalization applications were processedexpeditiously. As of February 2003, there were 37,000 noncitizens serving in active duty in the U.S.armed forces, almost 12,000 noncitizens serving in the selected reserves, and another 8,000 servingin the inactive national guard and ready reserves. Of the many pending bills containing provisions concerning expedited or posthumous citizenship as the result of military service, H.R. 1588 , the "National DefenseAuthorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004," became P.L. 108-136 on November 24, 2003. Title XVIIof H.R. 1588 , entitled "Naturalization and Other Immigration Benefits for MilitaryPersonnel and Families," amends existing military naturalization statutes by: reducing the periodof service required for naturalization based on peacetime service from three years to one year;waiving fees for naturalization based on military service during peacetime or wartime; permittingdiscretionary revocation of naturalization granted on or after the date of enactment throughpeacetime or wartime service if the citizen were discharged from military service under other thanhonorable conditions before serving honorably for an aggregate period of five years; permittingnaturalization processing overseas in U.S. embassies, consulates, and military bases; providing forpriority consideration for military leave and transport to finalize naturalization; and extendingnaturalization based on wartime service to members of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve. Additionally, the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary's designee within the DHS Bureau ofCitizenship and Immigration Services is authorized to request posthumous citizenship immediatelyupon obtaining permission from the next-of-kin. P.L. 108-136 expands immigration benefits available to the immediate relatives (spouses, children, and parents) of citizens, including posthumous citizens, who die from injuries or illnessesresulting from or aggravated by serving in combat. Such relatives would remain classified asimmediate relatives of a U.S. citizen for immigration purposes, notwithstanding the death of theservicemember, and could self-petition for immigrant status.