House lawmakers are urging federal agencies to quickly and aggressively adopt artificial intelligence technology, at a time when the push from civil rights and industry groups for new AI regulations is still waiting to get off the ground.

The House Appropriations Committee, led by Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, released several spending bills this week that encourage the government to incorporate AI into everything from national security functions to routine office work to the detection of pests and diseases in crops. Several of those priorities are not just encouraged but would get millions of dollars in new funding under the legislation still being considered by the committee.

And while comprehensive AI regulations are likely still months away and are unlikely to be developed this year, lawmakers seem keen on making sure the government is deploying AI where it can. The bills are backed by the GOP majority, and Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., the vice chair of the Congressional Artificial Intelligence Caucus, said agencies shouldn’t have to wait to start using AI.

‘We should support federal agencies harnessing the power and benefits of AI, as it has proven itself to be a powerful tool and will continue to be an invaluable asset for our federal agencies,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘The Departments of Energy and Defense, for example, have been leveraging AI for technical projects to enhance precision and accomplish tasks beyond human capabilities.’

Beyer added that he is ‘encouraged’ by commitments some agencies have made to ensure AI is used ethically, such as those made by the Department of Defense and intelligence agencies.

In the spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security, language is included that would fund AI and machine learning capabilities to help review cargo shipments at U.S. ports and for port inspections.

‘As the Committee has previously noted, delays in the integration of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and autonomy into the program require CBP Officers to manually review thousands of images to hunt for anomalies,’ according to report language on the bill. ‘Automation decreases the chance that narcotics and other contraband will be missed and increases the interdiction of narcotics that move through the nation’s [ports of entry].’

The bill encourages DHS to use ‘commercial, off-the-shelf artificial intelligence capabilities’ to improve government efforts to catch travelers and cargo that should not be allowed to enter the United States. It also calls on DHS to explore using AI to enforce the border, to help ensure the right illegal immigrants are removed, and at the Transportation Security Agency.

The committee’s bill to fund the Defense Department warns that the Pentagon is not moving fast enough to adopt AI technologies.

‘Capabilities such as automation, artificial intelligence, and other novel business practices – which are readily adopted by the private sector – are often ignored or under-utilized across the Department’s business operations,’ the report said. ‘This bill takes aggressive steps to address this issue.’

Among other things, the bill wants DOD to explore how to use AI to ‘significantly reduce or eliminate manual processes across the department,’ and says that effort justifies a $1 billion cut to the civilian defense workforce.

The bill also wants DOD to report on how it can measure its efforts to adopt AI, and to take on more student interns with AI experience.

The spending bill funding Congress itself wants legislative staff to explore how AI might be used to create closed captioning services for hearings, and how else AI might be used to improve House operations.

House lawmakers also see a need for AI at the Department of Agriculture. Among other things, the bill adds more money for AI in an agricultural research program run by the U.S. and Israel, proposes the use of AI and machine learning to detect pests and diseases in crops, and supports ongoing work to use AI for ‘precision agriculture and food system security.’

The effort to expand the government’s use of AI comes despite the pressure that has been building on Congress to quickly impose a regulatory framework around this emerging and already widely used technology. Lawmakers in the House and Senate have held several hearings on the issue, which have raised ideas that include a new federal agency to regulate AI and an AI commission.

But despite the urgency, Congress continues to move slowly. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said last week that he still wanted to take several months to take input, and implied that an AI regulatory plan might not be passed by Congress until next year.

‘Later this fall, I will convene the top minds in artificial intelligence here in Congress for a series of AI Insight Forums to lay down a new foundation for AI policy,’ he said last week.

The full committee is expected to take up these and other spending bills in the coming months – Republicans have made it clear they want to move funding bills for fiscal year 2024 on time this year, which means finishing by the summer.

EXCLUSIVE: Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson are raising new questions about a 2020 FBI briefing in which the agency said the senators’ investigation into Hunter Biden was advancing Russian disinformation at a time the FBI was looking into some of the same allegations.

‘The more we learn about what the FBI was up to in the summer of 2020, the more questions we have about what was done with information related to the Hunter Biden investigation,’ Grassley, R-Iowa, told Fox News Digital this week. He called the briefing ‘totally unnecessary’ and said it was a ‘clear effort to discredit our oversight.’

‘Was there a broader effort by federal law enforcement to improperly silence or sideline anything critical of the Biden family in the run-up to the 2020 election?’ Grassley asked. ‘The timeline that is emerging does not paint a picture of an apolitical FBI, and the bureau has a duty to explain itself, which it has so far failed to do.’

The two senators opened an investigation into Hunter Biden’s finances, specifically his role on the board of Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings. At the time of the FBI briefing, the senators were finalizing their report that would be released in September 2020.

On Aug. 6, 2020, the FBI provided a briefing to Grassley and Johnson ‘on behalf of the FBI and intelligence community,’ a briefing the senators have repeatedly said was given ‘because of pressure’ from Democrats ‘to falsely attack’ their investigation.

The two senators say that, in August 2020, FBI officials initiated a scheme to downplay derogatory information on Hunter Biden for the purpose of shutting down investigative activity relating to his potential criminal exposure by labeling it ‘disinformation.’ 

The senators also noted that whistleblowers have alleged that local FBI leadership ‘instructed employees not to look at the Hunter Biden laptop immediately after the FBI had obtained it.’

But the briefing took place as the Justice Department’s federal investigation into Hunter Biden was well underway. By December 2019, the FBI had obtained the laptop belonging to Hunter Biden and knew material on the laptop was ‘not manipulated’ and contained ‘reliable’ evidence.

Johnson told Fox News Digital the mixed messages from the FBI are problematic. 

‘As troubling as Biden family corruption is — and the extent to which it comprises American foreign policy — there is a much larger story of corruption to be uncovered,’ he said this week.

‘The complicity of federal law enforcement and the unequal application of justice is a true threat to our democracy,’ Johnson added. ‘Because the partisan corruption spans Democrat and Republican administrations, one has to wonder, ‘How is it being orchestrated and sustained?’’

The FBI has told Fox News the bureau had no comment when asked why the briefing was delivered to Grassley and Johnson in August 2020 and whether the FBI sought to downplay and discredit derogatory information about Hunter Biden.

Grassley and Johnson in September 2020 released their Hunter Biden report, which said Obama administration officials ‘knew’ that Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma was ‘problematic’ and that it interfered ‘in the efficient execution of policy with respect to Ukraine.’

Hunter Biden joined Burisma in April 2014 and reportedly connected the firm with consulting firm Blue Star Strategies to help the natural gas company fight corruption charges in Ukraine. During the time Hunter Biden was on the board of the company, Joe Biden was vice president and running U.S.-Ukraine relations and policy for the Obama administration.

Grassley and Johnson’s 2020 report also revealed U.S. Treasury Department records that ‘show potential criminal activity relating to transactions among and between Hunter Biden, his family and his associates with Ukrainian, Russian, Kazakh and Chinese nationals.’

Grassley and Johnson said they received records that Hunter Biden ‘sent thousands of dollars’ to people who have ‘either been involved in transactions consistent with possible human trafficking, an association with the adult entertainment industry or potential association with prostitution.’

IRS whistleblowers involved in the IRS’ investigation into Hunter Biden have corroborated the information contained in the Senate report, which also found millions of dollars in ‘questionable financial transactions’ between Hunter Biden and his associates and people with ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

On the other side of the Capitol, the House Judiciary, Oversight and Ways and Means committees have demanded transcribed interviews from more than a dozen Justice Department, IRS, FBI and Secret Service officials regarding allegations of politics influencing prosecutorial decisions in the Hunter Biden investigation.

The House Oversight Committee is  investigating the Biden family’s business dealings. That investigation has further revealed that the Biden family and its business associates created more than 20 companies and received more than $10 million from foreign nationals while Joe Biden served as vice president.

Committee Chairman James Comer said some of these payments could indicate attempts by the Biden family to ‘peddle influence’ and said the family appeared to take steps to ‘conceal the source and total amount received from the foreign companies.’

The White House continues to insist President Biden was ‘never in business’ with his son.

The DOJ last week announced that Hunter Biden will plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax and one charge of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. The plea deal is likely to prevent Hunter Biden from having to serve prison time.

Residents of Austin, Texas, and crime victims’ families are speaking out after District Attorney Jose Garza signed off on a plea deal for a woman for her part in a murder-for-hire plot that targeted her in-laws.

Jaclyn Alexa Edison was sentenced last week in Travis County, Texas, to 10 years probation after pleading guilty to conspiracy to attempt to commit capital murder by hiring two hit men who ultimately killed her then-husband’s father. The boyfriend’s mother survived.

Edison’s husband, Nicolas Shaughnessy, and the two hit men accepted plea deals of 35 years in prison. The victims’ families said that deal was too lenient, but Austin Police Retired Officers Association President Dennis Farris told Fox News Digital that Edison should have faced the same punishment as the others.

‘She should have gotten the same thing they got,’ Farris said. ‘They literally are just as guilty, she’s just as guilty as the person who pulled the trigger.’

Edison, who was 19 years old at the time of the crime, was offered ‘deferred adjudication,’ which means she accepted responsibility for the crime but the conviction was not placed on her record. The lawyer for the surviving victim said he has never seen a similar outcome.

‘In the close to half a century that I’ve worked with criminal law as a prosecutor and a defense attorney … I have never seen anything like this,’ attorney Steve Brittain told KXAN-TV. ‘I can’t put it together in my mind, and I just don’t understand it.’

Edison and her now ex-husband were accused of hiring Arieon Smith and Johnny Leon in 2018 to kill Shaughnessy’s adopted parents who owned Gallerie Jewelers in Austin in a scheme they hoped would net them their $2 million life insurance policy.

Ted Shaughnessy was found dead of multiple gunshot wounds in a hallway of his home after his wife, Corey Shaughnessy, returned fire at the hit men until she ran out of ammunition and hid in a closet to call 911, authorities said.

‘You can withdraw money from the bank to pay to have your in-laws killed, and this district attorney is going to let you basically walk away,’ Farris said. ‘I mean this is just insane.’

While part of Edison’s probation says she must check in to the Travis County Jail for two days each year on the anniversary of the murder as part of her probation, Farris told Fox News Digital that’s a slap on the wrist and that she will probably end up spending less than two days in jail based on the way the jails credit time served based on the time of day you clock in.

Garza, who was backed by a PAC linked to billionaire George Soros, has been criticized for years for what the families of crime victims say is a soft-on-crime approach that stems from adherence to progressive politics and ‘reimagining’ the justice system.

One of those family members is Nicholas Kantor, whose brother, Doug, was an innocent bystander when he was shot and killed in 2021 when two rival gangs of teenagers opened fire on each other in downtown Austin in one of the worst mass shootings in the city’s history. Two years later, Nicholas Kantor says Garza’s office has yet to deliver justice for his family and has even impeded progress toward that goal.

Kantor told Fox News Digital in response to news of Edison’s probation sentence that people need to ask themselves how they would feel if Edison had killed their mother or their father.

‘Would you feel contentment that the DA provided you with justice and peace of mind to settle your heart?’ Kantor said.

‘This is about the future of the justice system, if we continue to stand idle through deals and decisions like this without any protests and outrage, that this will become the new normal,’ Kantor added. ‘And while today it may be somebody else’s broken heart, tomorrow it could very well be yours.’

Garza ran on a platform of prosecuting police officers and has already gone after several of them, including the indictment of over 20 Austin police officers for their roles in subduing a Black Lives Matter riot in the wake of George Floyd’s death. He also worked to convict Army Sgt. Daniel Perry to 25 years in prison for shooting an armed Black Lives Matter protester who approached his car with a raised AK-47 style weapon. 

‘This is a sweetheart deal,’ Farris said. ‘Do you think he would offer or make a deal with the police officers he’s charged? Things are getting worse in Travis County because we are refusing to put people in jail for the worst crimes they commit.’

Garza’s office did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.

Associated Press contributed to this report.

The United Nations General Assembly is poised to approve a global framework this fall on ammunition management that could be dangerously vague and impact domestic policies in the United States, some Second Amendment advocates warn. 

In early June, the U.N.’s Open-Ended Working Group on Conventional Ammunition, also called the OEWG, completed its development of a new global framework.

The National Rifle Association and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturer’s Institute attended each of the OEWG’s meetings, pushing to water down certain aspects of the international plan. 

‘It is going to the General Assembly in September. It’s basically a forgone conclusion,’ James Baranowski, the NRA director of international affairs, told Fox News Digital. ‘It’s the way of the U.N. It’s a game of chess, not checkers.’

The General Assembly passed a resolution in February 2022 establishing the OEWG to address the accumulation of stockpiles in surplus, which issued a final report this month.

The framework can be used for leverage in the political arena if gun control advocates claim it is a standard for international law, Baranowski said. 

‘It could have been a much worse document to start the framework,’ Baranowski said. ‘That said, it is never going away. It is a living document that will be modified. We are going to have to fight this every year.’

The 15 objectives of the global framework establish standards and guidelines for international cooperation in ammunition management, Adedeji Ebo, director of the U.N. Office of Disarmament Affairs, said June 9, when the working group adopted the framework. 

‘The adoption of the set of political commitments is a tremendous achievement, which, I have no doubt, will be endorsed by the 78th Session of the U.N. General Assembly,’ Ebo said during his remarks. 

The framework’s objectives aim to curb the transporting of small arms into conflict zones, preventing unplanned explosions at munition sites and recognizing the increased role of women in ammunition management, Ebo noted.

With a push by the Second Amendment organizations, the working group watered down some terms and deleted from drafts references to the ‘individual’ end users of ammunition, Baranowski said. So, at least for now, the framework only applies to governments, not individual ammunition owners.

Still, the OEWG’s final report doesn’t fully define key terms such as ‘stockpile,’ and ‘end users.’ And under the broad definition, even a 25-round box could constitute a stockpile, Baranowski contends. 

‘You see ‘stockpile’ and ‘end user.’ A stockpile could be a million rounds in a government stockpile or it could be a box of 25 rounds at a local police station,’ Baranowski said. ‘It is limited to governments as it is currently written. We argued to confine it. But we think, eventually, that language will be removed. There was an effort to include individual end users.’

The United Nations did not respond to inquiries for this story.

But the U.N.’s Ebo called the framework a ‘ray of hope for the disarmament community and the peoples of the world who have long suffered from the scourge of war and armed violence exacerbated by the mismanagement and illicit flows of conventional ammunition.’

‘The elaboration of the global framework is truly a milestone in our collective efforts towards durable peace, security and sustainable development,’ Ebo added. 

–>

The New York Times’ 1619 Project founder Nikole Hannah-Jones said wealthy White people on the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action, adding that Justice Clarence Thomas is ‘irrelevant here.’

‘An elite, white majority determining after just 50 years of weak, half-hearted affirmative action efforts, that they are the ones to decide that enough has been done to address centuries of explicit racial exclusion against Black people is the most American ruling ever,’ Hannah-Jones tweeted following the historic Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action. ‘Let me make it simpler: Rich white people thinking THEY are the ones who get to say that society has done enough to mitigate that devastation of 350 years of explicit discrimination against Black people is the most American thing of all.’

‘Was going to write an essay about it, but why even bother. (Also, Clarence Thomas is actually irrelevant here. So thanks but no thanks),’ the ‘1619 Project’ creator said.

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the use of race as a factor in collegiate admissions is a violation of the  14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, stating that ‘A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrim­ination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination.’

‘Or a benefit to a student whose herit­age or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her ex­periences as an individual—not on the basis of race,’ reads the opinion.

READ THE SUPREME COURT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION OPINION – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett joined Justice in the majority opinion.