At a South Carolina campaign rally on Feb. 10, former President Donald Trump told a crowd of supporters that while he was president he told “one of the presidents of a big country” in the NATO alliance that he would not protect that country from a Russian invasion if that country didn’t pay. Trump then said, “In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.” Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to talk through Trump’s NATO comments, why they’re rattling European allies, whether a U.S. president could destroy the alliance, and how Congress might stop it. They also talked about why everyone here at Lawfare calls Section 1250A of the recent National Defense Authorization Act the “Anderson Saves NATO” provision.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott got together to talk over the week’s big national security news, including:“Is Revanchism a Dish Best Served Cold?” Russia boosters seem to be feeling bullish for the first time in a long time. This week, its forces captured the strategic town of Avdiivka from Ukrainian forces, who have been weakened by bickering among their Western allies. And imprisoned Russian dissident Alexei Navalny met with a tragic and highly suspicious end, just as Western governments came together at the Munich Security Conference. Is Russia right to be feeling its oats at this moment?“Bibi Steps.” As Israel prepares to mount a controversial military operation against Rafah—the last refuge for many displaced civilians in Gaza—there are cracks between the government of Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and the Biden administration, who in recent weeks have shown an increased willingness to target settler violence in the West Bank with sanctions, impose some conditionality on U.S. security assistance, and turn to the U.N. Security Council for possible support for a “temporary ceasefire,” even over Israeli objections. Are these signs of a bigger divide to come? And what will the impact be on the trajectory of the Gaza conflict?“Won’t Somebody PLEASE Think of the Children?!” The Kids Online Safety Act (or KOSA) is back in somewhat modified form, promising to introduce new regulations into how our children engage with online platforms—this time with broad bipartisan support, including from the Biden administration. But will it actually help protect children online? Or only put vulnerable communities more at risk?For object lessons, Alan recommended the Oscar-nominated Jeffrey Wright vehicle, American Fiction. Quinta endorsed “The Book of Love,” a spooky fantasy mystery and the debut novel by celebrated short story author Kelly Link. And Scott urged mid-Atlantic listeners to take their toddlers to Baltimore’s National Aquarium and spring for the wonderful family sunrise tour. Or for nature lovers not on the East Coast, check out the new podcast one-off Birds Are Cool, featuring Goat Rodeo’s own Cara Shillenn.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on February 22 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower, and Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the continued drama in Fulton County and what has happened since the blockbuster hearings last week. They also checked in on the Southern District of Florida to see what Judge Cannon is up to and discussed what we are waiting on in D.C. And of course, they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Zoom.To be able to submit questions to the panelists, you should become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 15, 2020: Alexei Navalny is Russia's most prominent dissident, opposition leader, and anti-corruption crusader—and the latest such person to be poisoned by the Vladimir Putin regime, which, of course, it denies. When we recorded this episode, Navalny's condition was improving as he received medical treatment in Germany. To discuss Navalny's career and why Putin chose now to attack him, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Alina Polyakova, President and CEO of the Center for European Policy Analysis. They talked about how Navalny has become such a thorn in the side of the Putin regime, why Putin keeps poisoning people as opposed to killing them by other means, and why the Russians are so ineffective at poisonings when they undertake them.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since a grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia, handed up an indictment in August of former President Donald Trump and 18 other defendants for their efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia, all eyes had been on the defendants’ behavior and their legal fate. That was until an explosive filing by one of the defendants, Mike Roman, alleged that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis had engaged in a kickback scheme through a romantic relationship she had with an outside prosecutor Willis had hired to participate in the case, Nathan Wade. Roman asked the presiding judge, Scott McAfee, to disqualify Willis and her office from the election case. Willis and Wade have since acknowledged their relationship but claim that Willis did not financially benefit from it.Last week, Judge McAfee held a two-day evidentiary hearing to determine whether Willis and Wade’s relationship presented a conflict of interest, requiring the removal of Willis and her office from the case. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck discussed the hearing and what’s likely to happen next with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower, and Georgia trial and appellate lawyer and Fulton County court watcher Andrew Fleischman.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Joe Biden took office with a big ambition: To repair America’s reputation abroad and set the country on a new path, where foreign policy would be crafted with the middle class in mind. So writes journalist Alexander Ward, whose new book, The Internationalists: The Fight to Restore American Foreign Policy After Trump, chronicles Biden’s first two years in the White House. The central players in Ward’s cast as the president’s senior advisers, chief among them National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who, four years earlier, had expected to be serving in the Hillary Clinton administration. Ward joined Shane Harris to talk about the Biden team's early efforts to sketch out a new agenda, the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the triumphs of the early days of war in Ukraine. His book offers a detailed, behind-the-scenes look at what may be one of the most experienced teams of foreign policy experts in a generation. Ward is a national security reporter at Politico. He was part of the reporting team behind one of the biggest scoops in recent memory, the leak of a draft opinion by the Supreme Court that overturned Roe v. Wade. Ward was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize for his reporting. Among the works mentioned in this episode:Ward’s book, The Internationalists: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/704738/the-internationalists-by-alexander-ward/ An excerpt from the book: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/19/jake-sullivan-globalization-biden-00141697 Ward’s newsletter at Politico: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily  Ward’s scoop on the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473 Ward on Twitter: https://twitter.com/alexbward?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As a new report on the intimidation of state and local officeholders from the Brennan Center for Justice points out, “The January 6 insurrection at the Capitol seemed to mark a new peak in extremist intimidation targeting public officials. But it was hardly the only act of political violence to break the period of relative stability that followed the assassinations of the 1960s.” Citing the 2017 shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise, last year’s hammer attack on Paul Pelosi, and many other cases, the report paints a troubling picture of today’s climate of political violence in America. To talk through the report and its implications, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic and Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Maya Kornberg, a Research Fellow at the Brennan Center’s Elections and Government Program and one of the report’s authors. They discussed how Maya and her team surveyed so many state and local officials across a number of jurisdictions, the pervasive risks and threats those officeholders face, and how these threats are distorting U.S. democracy as a whole.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The advocacy group Protect Democracy last month issued an updated version of its report entitled, “The Authoritarian Playbook.” The new report is called, “The Authoritarian Playbook for 2025: How an authoritarian president will dismantle our democracy and what we can do to protect it.” It is a fascinating compilation of things that Donald Trump has promised to do and how they could likely be expected to affect American democracy if he is elected to a second term in office. To discuss the report, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with two of its authors: Genevieve Nadeau and Erica Newland, both of Protect Democracy. They talked about what's new in the report, how much of it is speculation and how much of it is simply taking Donald Trump's words seriously, opportunities to mitigate the most dire consequences of which the report warns, and whether this is just baked into the American presidency when occupied by a truly authoritarian personality. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conflict in Gaza is headed toward a critical juncture. Israeli political leaders have signaled their intent to assault Rafah, one of the final safe havens for displaced Gazan civilians—a move that U.S. and other international leaders fear could trigger a humanitarian crisis, or the long-term displacement of Palestinians from Gaza. Meanwhile, negotiations for both a ceasefire and a longer term resolution of the crisis are ongoing, but have little to show thus far. To discuss the many moving pieces of the Gaza conflict, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down once again with Joel Braunold, Managing Director at the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace and someone who has long been involved in Middle East peace efforts. They discussed the current state of Israel’s military operations, how it is impacting (and being impacted by) domestic politics in Israel and elsewhere, and the significance of recent events ranging from the International Court of Justice’s grant of provisional measures to the Biden administration’s efforts to sanction the perpetrators of West Bank settler violence—all with an eye for better understanding where this crisis may yet be headed.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 10, 2016: This week at the Hoover Book Soiree, Jack Goldsmith interviewed Christopher Moran, a professor at the University of Warwick, on his book “Company Confessions: Secrets, Memoirs, and the CIA.” Moran's work is a history of CIA memoirs, but it's also a history of the Agency itself and its efforts to shape its image in the public eye. How does an organization whose work depends on keeping secrets justify its efforts within a democratic society?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were once again joined by co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Constitutional Annoyance.” Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson, the case weighing whether former President Trump’s involvement in Jan. 6 should disqualify him from being able to stand as a candidate in 2024 under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. And the justices, for once, seemed almost unified in their skepticism of the idea that he should be—though there was far less agreement as to why. Where is this case headed? And what will its ultimate impact be on the 2024 election and beyond?“Putting the Hur(t) On.” Special Counsel Robert Hur completed his investigation into President Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified documents last week and, while he opted not to bring any charges, his lengthy final report has caused a stir: not just for laying out Biden’s apparent mishandling of classified documents over an extended period of time but also for citing Biden’s advanced age and apparent memory issues as grounds for not prosecuting—observations that have reignited anxieties regarding Biden’s capacity to stand for reelection. Was Hur out of line or just doing his job in making these observations? And how will his conclusions impact events moving forward, including the prosecution of former President Trump for his own mishandling of classified documents?“‘I Can’t Pay the Rent,’ ‘But You Must Pay the Rent!’” Former President Trump has resumed his role as enforcer over the defense spending level of NATO members, suggesting most recently that he would encourage Russia to do whatever it wants with any members who fail to meet their commitments—comments that have triggered new anxiety over how NATO may fare in a second Trump presidency. How serious are these comments? What should folks be doing in response?For object lessons, Alan recommended the weirdness of Donald Glover's new spy remake, "Mr. & Mrs. Smith." Quinta urged listeners to check out a recent New York Times piece on "How Mark Meadows Became the Least Trusted Man in Washington." Scott mourned the end of football season by endorsing the sportsfan comedy of Annie Agar. And Ben announced that he had completed his quest to identify the worst rhetorical question headline ever.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” this one recorded before a live audience on Zoom on Friday afternoon. It’s been a wild week in Trump coverage. We’ve got a judgment from New York, we’ve got the best evidentiary hearing ever held in Fulton County, we’ve got Tyler McBrien at the scheduling conference for the New York criminal trial, and we’ve got updates from Florida and Washington.Joining Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes were Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien, and Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower, and they covered it all. They also took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters and, this week, guests.To be able to submit questions to the panelists, you should become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 10, 2020: Jim Baker served as general counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He was also the counsel for the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review at the Justice Department, where he supervised FISA applications. He joined Benjamin Wittes in the virtual Jungle Studio to discuss Inspector General Michael Horowitz's shocking report on inaccuracy in FISA applications, and the problems at the FBI that led to these errors.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The EU has finally agreed to its AI Act. Despite the political agreement reached in December 2023, some nations maintained some reservations about the text, making it uncertain whether there was a final agreement or not. They recently reached an agreement on the technical text, moving the process closer to a successful conclusion. The challenge now will be effective implementation. To discuss the act and its implications, Lawfare Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Itsiq Benizri, counsel at the law firm WilmerHale Brussels. They discussed how domestic politics shaped the final text, how governments and businesses can best prepare for new requirements, and whether the European act will set the international roadmap for AI regulation.You can listen to Eugenia’s October conversation about approaches to AI regulation with Itsiq and Arianna Evers here. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In February 2022, Russia launched a full scale invasion into Ukraine in the largest attack on a European country since World War II. This invasion did not start a new war, but escalated the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War that started in 2014 when Russian forces captured Crimea and invaded the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.In his book, “The War Came to Us: Life and Death in Ukraine,” author and journalist Christopher Miller tells the story of the past fourteen years in Ukraine through his personal experiences living and reporting in Ukraine since 2010. For this week’s Chatter episode, Anna Hickey spoke with Chris Miller about his book, what led to the full scale invasion in 2022, the 2014 capture of Crimea, and his journey from being a Peace Corps volunteer in Bakhmut in 2010 to a war correspondent.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book, “The War Came to Us: Life and Death in Ukraine,” by Christopher MillerThe article, “Documents show Russian separatist commander signed off on executions of three men in Sloviansk” by Christopher MillerThe book, "Voroshilovgrad" by Serhiy ZhadanChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, is considered must-pass legislation and is increasingly becoming the only reliable vehicle for national cyber policymaking. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Jonathan Cedarbaum, Professor of Practice at George Washington University Law School and Book Review Editor at Lawfare, and Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at Lawfare, to talk about the key cyber provisions of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2024. They talked about new cyber provisions that address threats from Mexican criminal organizations and China, along with how some of the new cyber provisions expand the military’s role in protecting against threats to critical infrastructure. They also discussed what Jonathan and Matt would like to see in future versions of the NDAA.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Many international law scholars are skeptical about the efficacy of international law to shape state behavior—and even international law's reality as law—because it lacks a centralized hierarchical legislature, executive branch, or judiciary. In his new book, “Law for Leviathan: Constitutional Law, International Law, and the State,” Daryl Levinson of NYU Law School challenges this conception of international law by arguing that it is structurally similar to domestic constitutional law in its ability to constrain states and in its strategies for doing so. Jack Goldsmith sat down with Levinson to discuss the challenge of regulating the state through both international law and constitutional law and what constitutional law theory can learn from international relations theory about how this happens. They also discussed how IR balance of power theory is like Madison's conception of constitutionalism, the implications for his theory for understanding how to hold states accountable for illegal action, and how to think about these ideas in light of the ostensible waning of state power in the modern era.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Unfortunately, Americans are certainly not strangers to far-right terrorism. From the 2015 mass murder at a historic Black church in Charleston, to the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, these horrific incidents are only the latest in a decades-long process, in which harmful conspiracy theories, radical ideologies, and hostility toward government come together to form a grave and increasing threat to democracy. In their book, “God, Guns, and Sedition: Far-Right Terrorism in America,” Bruce Hoffman and Jacob Ware tell the story of the rise of far-right terrorism—and explain how to counter it. Lawfare Associate Editor Katherine Pompilio sat down with Hoffman and Ware to unpack their book. They discussed the historical trajectory of violent right-wing extremism, Donald Trump’s effect on these groups and the threat of far-right terrorism heading into the 2024 election, how to address the issue, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On January 15, Bernardo Arévalo took office as the new president of Guatemala. The transfer of power had been far from assured: after Arévalo triumphed in August elections as an anti-corruption reformer, Guatemala’s political elite did their best to throw legal obstacles in his way and prevent him from taking power. His presidency represents a stunning victory for Guatemalan democracy, which has long been under threat. But there are plenty of difficulties still ahead.To catch up on what’s been happening in Guatemala, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Vaclav Masek, a Guatemalan sociologist and columnist. They discussed how Arévalo triumphed, the significance of his victory for Guatemala and the region, and what all this might tell us about the ability of democracies to resist authoritarian backsliding around the world.If you’re interested in more on Arévalo, you can also listen to Quinta’s conversation from August with Manuel Meléndez-Sánchez about the election and Arévalo’s victory.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan made his long-awaited return to the podcast for a (brief, so savor it) reunion with Quinta and Scott to talk over the week’s big national security news, including:“Losing the Immunity Challenge.” Earlier this week, the D.C. Circuit rejected former President Trump’s attempt to appeal the denial of his claims of presidential immunity to criminal charges arising from Jan. 6. That issue is now primed for the Supreme Court. Will it take it up? And what will it decide?“Ordeal or No Deal.” As Israel’s military offensive in Gaza continues, the United States is trying to facilitate a short-term hostage deal—and a longer term bargain that would incorporate Israel and Saudi Arabia into a security pact. How realistic are these proposals? And how might they impact the dynamics of the Gaza conflict?“The Shakedown Breakdown.” Congressional Republicans who once insisted on tying Ukraine assistance to a border deal have now turned against any effort to hash out a border deal—even as House Republicans have also failed to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas or to pass their own stand-alone assistance bill for Israel. Where does this all leave aid for Ukraine? And what ramifications will this congressional dysfunction have moving forward?For object lessons, Alan shared the thing he spent most of his time off on: his new substack, “The Rozy Outlook.” In light of this week’s oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson, Quinta recommended Mark Graber’s book on the 14th Amendment, "Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty." And Scott urged listeners to check out one of his favorite Twitter threads in recent memory, asking “who got that one Jeopardy clip”?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 13, 2019: Julian Mortenson, Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, is the author of a remarkable new article entitled "Article II Vests Executive Power, Not the Royal Prerogative," in the Columbia Law Review and available on SSRN.Recently, Benjamin Wittes spoke with the professor about the article, which Mortenson has been working on for years—as long as the two have known each other. The article explores the history of exactly three words of the U.S. Constitution—the first three words of Article II, to be precise: "the executive power."Huge claims about presidential power have rested on a conventional understanding of these three words. Julian argues that this conventional understanding is not just partially wrong, or mostly wrong, but completely wrong, as a matter of history. And, he tries to supplant it with a new understanding that he argues is actually a very old understanding of what those words mean.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On February 8, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson, on the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling that former President Donald Trump is disqualified from the office of the presidency under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment and cannot appear on the 2024 presidential ballot.On this week's “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on February 8 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Roger Parloff and Quinta Jurecic, Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower, and law professor at Indiana University Gerard Magliocca to talk about the oral arguments, how the justices may rule, and the implications of the ruling. They also checked in with the other Trump Trials in Fulton County, the Southern District of Florida, and D.C., to see what is new. And of course they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Zoom.To be able to submit questions to the panelists, you should become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Some people call it "investor citizenship" while others label it a "passport for sale" scheme. Either way, the last few decades have seen the global citizenship industry grow and evolve in ways that both reflect and impact issues around national sovereignty, tax regimes, international business, and global inequities.David Priess chatted about these and related issues with political sociologist and author Kristin Surak, whose recent book The Golden Passport takes a multidisciplinary look at global mobility for the wealthy and the complex system that has developed around it. They discussed the new "most powerful passport" rankings, the types of people who seek different citizenship through investment, Turkey's rise as a major Citizenship By Investment (CBI) player, the rise and fall of the program in Cyprus, how intermediary companies power the CBI system, the trailblazing CBI role of St. Kitts and Nevis, the challenges of European countries attempting to start and keep CBI programs, differing perceptions of CBI around the world, issues of equity and ethics, and the recent phenomena of digital nomads.Among the works mentioned in this episode:"The Henley Passport Index", Henley & PartnersThe book The Golden Passport: Global Mobility for Millionaires by Kristin SurakThe book Moneyland by Oliver BulloughThe book Making Tea, Making Japan by Kristin SurakThe book The Despot's Guide to Wealth Management by J. C. SharmanChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been a wild and woolly week on Capitol Hill with respect to the border, Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and a lot of other stuff. On Wednesday, the Senate was preparing to vote both on the apparently doomed supplemental deal that included border security provisions, and on a deal without them. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Reynolds and Eric Ciaramella of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace to discuss the congressional politics and also the situation in Ukraine that drives the need for congressional action. They talked about how the border and the Ukraine supplemental got wrapped up together, how they're being disaggregated, whether there is a path forward for Ukraine aid now that the Senate has killed the compromise, what's happening on the ground in Ukraine, and what would happen if the United States doesn't act.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On February 6, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected former President Donald Trump's appeal of his presidential immunity defense in the federal government's Jan. 6 case against him. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic, Scott R. Anderson, and Roger Parloff, and Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett, in front of a live audience on YouTube and Riverside for a deep dive into the ruling, its meaning, and the court’s unanimity. They also discussed what comes next and what the Supreme Court might do in response.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Among the many horrific stories emerging out of the conflicts in Ukraine and Israel/Gaza are instances of sexual and gender-based violence. It’s an issue that is pervasive in many armed conflicts, and yet, even now, it’s often treated as an afterthought. There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of the lesser-appreciated ones is the limitation of existing law. Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett spoke with Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, a professor at University of Minnesota Law School and a former UN Special Rapporteur. They talked about the legal framework around sexual and gender-based violence, the challenges of prosecuting these acts of violence as international crimes, and where the law fails.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

One of the dark sides of the rapid development of artificial intelligence and machine learning is the increase in computer-generated child pornography and other child sexual abuse material, or CG-CSAM for short. This material threatens to overwhelm the attempts of online platforms to filter for harmful content—and of prosecutors to bring those who create and disseminate CG-CSAM to justice. But it also raises complex statutory and constitutional legal issues as to what types of CG-CSAM are, and are not, legal.To explore these issues, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Riana Pfefferkorn, a Research Scholar at the Stanford Internet Observatory, who has just published a new white paper in Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract paper series exploring the legal and policy implications of CG-CSAM. Joining in the discussion was her colleague David Thiel, Stanford Internet Observatory's Chief Technologist, and a co-author of an important technical analysis of the recent increase in CG-CSAM.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk over the meaty week of national security news, including: “The Neighborhood is Getting Worse.” Three American service members were killed in a drone attack committed by Iran-backed militias in Jordan this past weekend. The Biden administration has promised a military response, but one of the groups believed to be responsible has just declared a unilateral ceasefire, seemingly at Iran’s urging. How should the United States respond? And what will the regional ramifications be?“Don’t Seek Redress in Texas.” Texas governor Greg Abbott has opted to ignore a federal court ruling demanding that he take down barriers on the Rio Grande, on the basis of a novel (and highly dubious) legal theory asserting that the state has the exclusive constitutional authority to defend itself from invasion by migrants. How should the Biden administration respond?“Provisional Victory?” The International Court of Justice has issued provisional measures in the genocide case against Israel over its Gaza operations, directing it to punish genocidal rhetoric and allow in humanitarian assistance but stopping short of requiring a ceasefire. Is this a vindication of Israel’s actions or a condemnation? And what will it mean for the trajectory of the conflict?For object lessons, Quinta celebrated the chaos of the New Jersey Democratic Senate primary. Scott highlighted the latest new feature at Lawfare: transcripts of its podcasts. And Ben gave Scott a very special gift, with which he is certain to put an eye out.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on February 1 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower and Lawfare Senior Editors Roger Parloff and Quinta Jurecic about amicus briefs filed at the Supreme Court in the Trump disqualification case and Trump's financial situation given the fines and damages levied against him in multiple civil cases. They also checked in on Fulton County and talked about everything we are waiting on from Judge Engoron's decision in New York to a decision from the D.C. Circuit on Trump's presidential immunity claim. And of course they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Zoom. To be able to submit questions to the panelists, you should become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 6, 2020: On Friday, the Lawfare Podcast hosted a conversation on the wide-ranging policy implications of the U.S. strike that killed Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ leader Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, deputy commander of Iraq’s quasi-official Popular Mobilization Forces and leader of the Iraqi militia and PMF Keta’ib Hezbollah.Today’s special edition episode leaves the policy debate behind to zero-in on the law behind the strike. Law of war and international law experts Scott R. Anderson, Bobby Chesney, Jack Goldsmith, Ashley Deeks and Samuel Moyn join Benjamin Wittes to discuss the domestic and international law surrounding the strike, how the administration might legally justify it, what the president might do next and how Congress might respond.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear argument in Trump v. Anderson, former President Donald Trump’s appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s historic decision taking him off the state’s presidential primary ballot. In determining whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering Trump excluded from the state’s ballot, the Supreme Court faces one of the most fraught questions facing our democracy today.Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han asked two legal scholars who could not disagree more with one another whether they think the Supreme Court should disqualify Trump under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Sam Moyn is Chancellor Kent Professor of Law and History at Yale University. He thinks the Supreme Court has to unanimously reverse the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision and keep the current Republican frontrunner on the ballot. Ilya Somin is Professor of Law at George Mason University and B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute. He thinks the Supreme Court should take Trump off the ballot despite its facially anti-democratic optics. They went through the legal questions in front of the Court, the political and philosophical implications of disqualifying Trump under Section 3, and the interplay of law and politics that overlays it all.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

American aid to global victims of natural disasters might seem like a relatively new phenomenon, perhaps linked to the Marshall Plan and other major programs in the past several decades. But US efforts to assist those suffering from earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, major flooding, and other such catastrophes actually goes back to the James Madison administration, followed by a burst of intense activity and the birth of the modern US approach at the very start of the 1900s.David Priess chatted with Julia Irwin, history professor at Louisiana State University and author of the book Catastrophic Diplomacy, about the academic study of disaster assistance, why some natural disasters stick in collective memory more than others, how US aid for catastrophes started in 1812 in Venezuela, why US disaster aid expanded in the late 1800s, case studies from Martinique (1902) and Jamaica (1907) to Italy (1908) and Japan (1923), the effects of the two world wars on US disaster aid, the genesis of USAID and other governmental entities, the modern role of former presidents in raising money for disaster relief, the concept of disaster risk reduction, what contemporary US catastrophic assistance efforts have learned from the past, and the disaster movie genre.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Catastrophic Diplomacy by Julia IrwinThe book Making the World Safe: The American Red Cross and a Nation's Humanitarian Awakening by Julia IrwinThe book The Great Kantō Earthquake and the Chimera of National Reconstruction in Japan by J. Charles SchenckingThe movie WaterworldThe book Disaster Citizenship: Survivors, Solidarity, and Power in the Progressive Era by Jacob A.C. RemesChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We're approaching the historic oral argument of the U.S. Supreme Court in Trump v. Anderson. That's the case over whether Donald Trump is disqualified from holding the presidency under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars certain insurrectionists from holding certain federal and state posts. Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff sat down with James A. Heilpern, a Senior Fellow at Brigham Young University Law School. Heilpern co-authored with Michael T. Worley a new article on Section 3 that was just posted online January 1 and yet has already been cited in several Supreme Court briefs, including the merits brief of the voter challengers in Trump v. Anderson. It addresses the disputed issue of whether Section 3 even applies to presidents, and it concludes that it does. The article uses corpus linguistics and other forms of legal research to look at how crucial phrases were used in 1788, when the original Constitution was ratified, and also in 1868, when Section 3 was ratified.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

During a late night press conference in August, an Atlanta-area prosecutor announced a sprawling criminal case against Donald Trump and his allies for their alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia. In a new book, investigative reporters Dan Klaidman and Michael Isikoff tell the story of the events that led to that moment—and the local prosecutor behind at all.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower spoke with Klaidman and Isikoff about the new details and insights revealed in their book, “Find Me the Votes: A Hard-Charging Georgia Prosecutor, a Rogue President, and the Plot to Steal an American Election.” In a wide-ranging conversation, they discussed the Jan. 6 committee's role in the Fulton County investigation, Sidney Powell's request for preemptive pardons in the aftermath of the 2020 election, Rudy Giuliani's plan to access to voting systems in Georgia, and recent allegations that District Attorney Fani Willis engaged in an improper relationship with one of her special prosecutors.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

U.S. military operations against Houthi rebels in Yemen have escalated rapidly in recent weeks, culminating in a number of major strikes aimed at degrading their ability to threaten Red Sea shipping traffic. But the war powers reports the Biden administration has provided to Congress are raising questions about how it is legally justifying this latest military campaign. To discuss the burgeoning conflict in Yemen and what it might mean for war powers, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Brian Finucane, Senior Adviser at the Crisis Group; Lawfare Co-founder and Harvard Law School Professor Jack Goldsmith; and Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck. They talked about their recent pieces on the topic, what we know and don’t know about the administration’s legal theory, and what the law might mean for how the conflict evolves moving forward.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Everyone recognizes sanctions as one of the United States’ most powerful tools of economic statecraft. But few realize that much of the information behind sanctions designations comes from another office within the Treasury Department: specifically, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (or FinCEN). And over the past few years, as sanctions and other economic tools have become more and more important, FinCEN has been evolving its operations and activities as well.To discuss the current state of FinCEN and what its future holds, Lawfare Contributing Editor Brandon Van Grack and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson had a conversation with its current Director, Andrea Gacki, for the latest installment of their “The Regulators” series, focusing on the policymakers at the frontlines of national security and economic statecraft. They discussed FinCEN’s involvement in the historic Binance settlement, what new policies FinCEN is rolling out to tackle everything from beneficial ownership to residential real estate, and how it is working with similar organizations around the globe.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, just Scott was joined for a Bizarro-world episode with guests Lawfare Senior Editor and Brookings Senior Fellow Molly Reynolds (back for a second episode in a row!) and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower! They talked over some of the week’s big stories, including:“Two Houses, Divided Against Themselves...” The fate of key national security legislation—including the Ukraine supplemental and border legislation—is increasingly coming down to the increasingly dysfunctional dynamics within and between the two chambers of Congress. What does this tell us about how our most democratic institution is operating?“Fani, Be Tender With My Love.” In recent weeks, Fulton Co. Prosecutor Fani Willis’s case against former President Trump and his associates has been endangered by rumors that she is engaged in a longstanding affair with subordinate prosecutor Nathan Wade—and that she extended the investigation to secure more salary for him. But is the story more smoke than fire?“Carpe Seize ‘Em.” The Biden administration has officially come out in qualified support of seizing Russia’s frozen assets to compensate Ukraine, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is scheduled to consider authorizing legislation this week. Is this finally a route to accountability? Or do the associated risks outweigh the benefits?For object lessons, Molly endorsed David Grann’s latest book, “The Wager.” Scott shouted out listener Paul whose birthday party he inadvertently crashed this past weekend, and urged other listeners to come say hi if they see him in the wild! And Anna urged anyone seeking a divorce in the state of Georgia to seek out the fine people at the Cobb County courthouse (who also make a lovely salad).Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on January 25 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower discussed all of the Section 3 litigation occuring across the country and Roger Parloff's recent article about whether the president is an officer of the United States. They talked about why we are still waiting on the D.C. Circuit to rule on Trump's presidential immunity claim and when the D.C. trial may actually start. They also talked about what is going on in Fulton County and Michael Roman's motion to disqualify District Attorney Fani Willis. And of course, they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Zoom. To be able to submit questions to the panelists, you should become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 12, 2021: President Joe Biden has conducted military strikes in Syria, has articulated legal theories under which the series of strikes were proper and has temporarily reined in the use of drone strikes. To talk about Biden and war powers, Benjamin Wittes sat down with John Bellinger, who served as the legal adviser at the State Department and the legal adviser for the National Security Council in the Bush administration; Lawfare senior editor Scott Anderson, who worked in the State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser, as well as in the Iraqi embassy; and Rebecca Ingber, who also worked in the State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser and is currently a professor at Cardozo Law School. They talked about how the Biden administration justified the strikes in Syria, the reports it has not yet given on its legal and policy framework for counterterrorism, whether this is the year that AUMF reform might finally happen and which authorizations to use military force might finally see reform.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In front of a live audience at the Knight Foundation's INFORMED conference in Miami, Florida, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Hon. Kenneth L. Wainstein, Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security; Jameel Jaffer, Executive Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University; and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic about government surveillance of open source social media.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Outer space is back in style. For the first time in decades, NASA is sending astronauts back to the moon. Millionaires are exiting the atmosphere on a regular basis. And Elon Musk says humans may land on Mars to set up settlements by 2030. But would mastering space be worth it?In their new book, “A City on Mars,” co-authors (and spouses) Dr. Kelly and Zach Weinersmith argue that it’s probably not. From biology to engineering to international law, they charmingly survey the many charms and dangers that space inevitably entails, with pictures to boot. For this week’s Chatter episode, Scott R. Anderson spoke with Kelly and Zach about their book, what role they think space exploration and settlement should play in humanity’s future, and why space may not be all it’s cracked up to be anytime soon.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book “Soonish,” also by Kelly and Zach.The book “Dark Skies: Space Expansionism, Planetary Geopolitics, and the Ends of Humanity” by Daniel Deudney.The book “The Creation of States in International Law” by James Crawford.The television series “The Expanse.”The 1970s film “Libra.”The television series “For All Mankind.”Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Heather Cox Richardson is the author of the book “Democracy Awakening: Notes on the State of America,” which looks at the evolution of American democracy and traces the roots of Donald Trump’s “authoritarian experiment” to the earliest days of the republic. Lawfare’s Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Richardson to discuss the state of American democracy today, the historical context we should use to understand the current threats to democracy, and what we can learn from previous periods of American history.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Software liability has been dubbed the “third rail of cybersecurity policy.” But the Biden administration’s National Cybersecurity Strategy directly takes it on, seeking to shift liability onto those who should be taking reasonable precautions to secure their software. What should a software liability regime look like? Jim Dempsey, a Senior Policy Adviser at the Stanford Cyber Policy Center, recently published a paper as part of Lawfare’s Security by Design project entitled “Standards for Software Liability: Focus on the Product for Liability, Focus on the Process for Safe Harbor,” where he offers a proposal for a software liability regime. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Jim to discuss his proposal. They talked about the problem his paper is seeking to solve, what existing legal theories of liability can offer a software liability regime and where they fall short, and his three-part definition for software liability that involves a rules-based floor and a process-based safe harbor.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The fallout from the SolarWinds intrusion took a new turn with the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) decision to file a cybersecurity-related enforcement action against the SolarWinds corporation and its Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), Timothy G. Brown, on October 30 of last year. To talk about the details and significance of this enforcement action, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Shoba Pillay, a partner at Jenner & Block and a former federal prosecutor, and Jennifer Lee, also a partner at Jenner & Block and a former Assistant Director in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. They discussed the cybersecurity and national security implications of the SolarWinds hack, what the SolarWinds enforcement action suggests about the SEC’s expectations for disclosure obligations of companies, and whether the SEC or another agency is best suited to determine whether and how SolarWinds should be held accountable. They also discussed larger takeaways and messages sent by the SEC’s decision to charge a CISO in this case. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There is much debate among academics and policy experts over the power the Constitution affords to the president and Congress to initiate military conflicts. But as Michael Ramsey and Matthew Waxman, law professors at the University of San Diego and Columbia, respectively, point out in a recent law review article, this focus misses the mark. In fact, the most salient constitutional war powers question—in our current era dominated by authorizations for the use of military force—is not whether the president has the unilateral authority to start large-scale conflicts. Rather, it is the scope of Congress’s authority to delegate its war-initiation power to the president. This question is particularly timely as the Supreme Court appears growingly skeptical of significant delegations of congressional power to the executive branch.Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at Lawfare, spoke with Waxman and Ramsey about their article. They discussed the authors' findings about the history of war power delegations from the Founding era to the present, what these findings might mean if Congress takes a more assertive role in the war powers context, and why these constitutional questions matter if courts are likely to be hesitant to rule on war powers delegation questions.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Senior Editor and Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Molly Reynolds to talk through some big stories at the intersection of politics and national security, including:“Over the Hill.” Congress is back in town and up to its old tricks, kicking the can of government funding down the road and still debating a funding package for Ukraine and other Biden administration priorities. As President Biden prepares to meet with congressional leaders at the White House, what are the odds of any sort of functioning legislature in this heated election year?“Rewarmed Deterrence?” After weeks of threats, the United States and its allies finally took military action against the Houthi movement that has been threatening maritime traffic through the Red Sea in purported response to the Israeli military operation in Gaza. But will this solve the problem or only invite another cycle of escalation?“The Frozen Corn Primary.” The first step of the 2024 election is officially over and the race is down to three candidates, with former President Trump having won the Iowa caucuses handily over rivals Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley. What does this first race tell us about the trajectory of the 2024 race—and how it intersects with Trump’s legal travails?For object lessons, Quinta recommended Paul Murray's book “The Beesting” as a pleasantly sad-funny read. Scott gave his annual PSA about why it's worth watching the divisional round of the NFL playoffs and endorsed the amazing "Art But Make it Sports" account on Twitter and Substack. And Molly told the story of Bob, the man who found the Alaska Airlines door plug in his backyard. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on January 18 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff discussed where the Section 3 disqualification litigation stands across the country and at the Supreme Court, about some amicus briefs, about the lack of action from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Trump's presidential immunity defense, and about a puzzling statement from a few D.C. Circuit judges on a different D.C. Circuit matter involving Twitter and executive privilege. They also talked about what Judge Cannon is up to in Florida, and of course, they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Zoom. To be able to submit questions to the panelists, you should become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 28, 2017: President Trump kicked off the first foreign policy crisis of his new administration by signing an executive order mandating the construction of the much-promised border wall with Mexico, resulting in as-yet-unresolved confusion as to how the wall will be paid for and an ongoing diplomatic scuffle with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. Benjamin Wittes spoke with Stephanie Leutert, the Mexico Security Initiative Fellow at the University of Texas at Austin and writer of Lawfare's "Beyond the Border" series, to chat about what the wall might look like, how effective it will or won't be, and what this means for U.S.-Mexico relations.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reached a settlement with location data broker X-Mode Social. X-Mode collects over 10 billion location data points from all over the world every day, and sells it to clients in a range of industries, like advertisers, consulting firms, and private government contractors. The FTC argued that the data broker was conducting unfair business practices, including selling people’s sensitive location data.To discuss the FTC settlement and its implications, Lawfare's Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Justin Sherman, Founder and CEO of Global Cyber Strategies and a Senior Fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy. They talked about the FTC’s groundbreaking decision to list sensitive locations about which X-Mode cannot sell data, the likelihood that we will see further FTC action against data brokers, and the persistent need for comprehensive privacy legislation to better address harms.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lloyd Austin's hospitalization and delayed communication about it have spurred much commentary and questions about the role of the secretary of defense in the US nuclear-strike chain of command.David Priess spoke with Hans Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, about his path to expertise on nuclear issues, the chain of command for nuclear strike authorization (and recent comments from elected representatives that misunderstand it), alternatives to the current system, fictional scenarios of nuclear launches, what is known about different nuclear states' authorization processes, the "letters of last resort" for UK nuclear submarines, deterrence and human psychology, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The TV movie The Day AfterThe movie WarGamesThe movie The Bedford IncidentThe music video for "Land of Confusion" by GenesisThe movie Dr. StrangeloveThe movie Fail SafeThe movie The Man Who Saved the WorldThe movie A Few Good Men"Finger on the Button," paper by Jeffrey G. Lewis and Bruno Tertais, Middlebury Institute of International Studies at MontereyThe book The Dead Hand by David HoffmanThe movie Crimson TideChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, the Department of Defense released its first-ever policy on civilian harm reduction. But as Marc Garlasco recently wrote in Lawfare, “[T]he policy comes at an awkward time … The U.S. military has issued guidance on how to protect civilians during operations just as its close ally Israel has reportedly killed thousands of Palestinians with American bombs.” And yet, many aspects of the new policy are nothing short of groundbreaking.  Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Marc, a former targeting professional and war crimes investigator and current military advisor at PAX, as well as Emily Tripp, the Director of Airwars, a transparency watchdog NGO which tracks, assesses, archives, and investigates civilian harm claims in conflict-affected nations. They discussed the state of civilian harm worldwide; the good, the bad, and the ugly of the Pentagon’s new policy; and recent efforts to get U.S. allies and partners to buy in. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chimène Keitner is the Martin Luther King Jr. Professor of Law at the University of California at Davis. She is a leading international law authority and served for a number of years at the State Department’s Office of the Legal Adviser. She is the author of a lengthy piece in Lawfare about South Africa's petition under the Genocide Convention against Israel in the International Court of Justice.Chimène joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the litigation. What is South Africa's claim under the Genocide Convention? What is Israel's defense? Where are both sides vulnerable? And how will the court likely consider the matter at this preliminary stage?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the last two months, Houthi militants have waged more than 27 attacks against merchant shipping and U.S. and partner forces in the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, purportedly in response to the war in Gaza. These attacks have significantly disrupted global shipping and surged the Middle East into an even more precarious security situation. Following a large-scale Houthi attack on U.S. and British ships, the U.S. and U.K. on Jan. 11 launched over 150 munitions targeting almost 30 Houthi sites in Yemen. The U.S. on Jan. 12 carried out another strike on a Houthi radar facility. The Houthis have since retaliated with multiple strikes targeting U.S. forces. Yesterday, the Houthis for the first time successfully struck a cargo ship owned and operated by the United States.Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Gregory Johnsen, the Associate Director of the Institute for Future Conflict at the U.S. Air Force Academy and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to discuss the spate of Houthi attacks, the U.S. response and the associated domestic and international law questions, and where the fighting is likely to go from here. What can history tell us about the possible paths forward? Why did the U.S. act when it did? What’s in it for the Houthis? They chewed over these questions and more. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 4, 2017: Yesterday, Just Security and the Center on Law and Security at New York University School of Law hosted Benjamin Wittes for a conversation on a question about the path of the Trump presidency so far: what happens when we can’t take the president’s oath of office seriously?Ben’s talk focused on an essay he and Quinta Jurecic posted to Lawfare simultaneously with the speech, in which they argued that the presidential oath—little discussed though it may be in constitutional jurisprudence and academic literature—is actually the glue that holds together many of our assumptions about how government functions. And when large enough numbers of people come to doubt the sincerity of the president’s oath, those assumptions begin to crumble.Big thanks to Ryan Goodman of Just Security and Zachary Goldman of the Center on Law and Security for putting together this event. Make sure to also read Ryan’s Just Security followup post on his discussion with Ben and the questions raised by our essay.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to discuss the week’s big national security and courtroom news, including:“Ergo Omnes.” South Africa has brought Israel to the International Court of Justice for actions relating to its military campaign in Gaza, based on a novel legal theory that alleges Israeli violations of the Genocide Convention and asserts standing by virtue of the universal obligation to prevent genocide. What practical impact is this litigation likely to have? And what does it mean as a precedent for the international community?“Cert(ain Doom) Petition.” The Supreme Court has officially taken up former President Trump’s appeal of a Colorado Supreme Court decision disqualifying him from the 2024 ballot there on the grounds that he is ineligible to hold office. While some have welcomed the chance to nationalize Colorado’s holding, others have warned that doing so would be a grave blow to popular democracy. How might the matter play out? And what will it mean for the 2024 election and after?“Void Austin.” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spent several days in the hospital earlier this month—without notifying the White House, leaving what some believe was a gaping hole at the highest level of the U.S. military chain of command. How big a problem was this? What steps should be taken in response?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on January 11 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff, and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, about the closing arguments in the New York civil case, about the Supreme Court's decision to grant Trump's petition for it to review the Colorado Supreme Court's decision barring him from the ballot under the 14th Amendment, and about the flurry of motions filed in Fulton County by the January 8 deadline. They also checked in on the Southern District of Florida to see what was, or wasn't, going on, and took audience questions from Lawfare’s Material Supporters on Zoom. To be able to submit questions to the panelists, become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 26, 2015: On this week’s Lawfare Podcast, Gregory Johnsen outlines the current state-of-play in Yemen. Johnsen, who is a writer-at-large for Buzzfeed News, a doctoral candidate at Princeton University, and an all-things-Yemen-expert, walks Ben through the byzantine power politics in Sanaa that led to the conflict now engulfing Yemen and he explains why the war shouldn’t be viewed as just another Sunni-Shia fight. Yet while he clarifies that the issues that sparked the war are much more local, he warns that the longer the conflict goes on, the more likely it is to expand. Johnsen also outlines the events that led to the Saudi intervention and whether or not Yemen—which he says is really twelve separate factions now—can ever be put back together again.Johnsen is the author of The Last Refuge: Yemen, al Qaeda, and America’s War in Arabia. Follow him on Twitter for the latest updates on Yemen.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On January 11, 2024, Donald J. Trump arrived in a New York courtroom for closing arguments in the civil fraud case against the former president, his company, and his adult sons. The suit, brought by the state’s attorney general Letitia James, alleges that Trump and his company misled lenders about the former president’s net worth in order to secure better business deals. The case is not Trump’s only legal trouble, but it’s one that could have a consequential impact for his family business and the image he has crafted for himself as a richer-than-rich, deal-making business man.What are the legal issues at stake? What might Trump argue on appeal? And how could the outcome affect Trump’s finances?To talk it all through, Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower spoke with Tristan Snell, former New York Assistant Attorney General and lead prosecutor in the Trump University fraud case. Tristan is also the author of a forthcoming book called, “Taking Down Trump.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Brandon Stoddard was one of the most accomplished executives in broadcast television history. In his career at ABC, he helped bring to the small screen such legendary mini-series as “Roots” and “The Winds of War,” as well as the acclaimed television series “Moonlighting” and “Roseanne.” But arguably his most consequential and controversial decision was to air the made-for-TV movie “The Day After,” which graphically depicted the effects of a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union. Stoddard faced opposition from his colleagues, pundits, and even the Reagan White House, which pressured ABC to pull the film. But having conceived of the project as an impetus for people around the world to grapple with the potential of a devastating war, Stoddard forged ahead and broadcast the film in November 1983. It was an epochal event in U.S. history. One hundred million people tuned in to watch, and the movie became the most-watched in television history. It was a national moment of the kind Americans rarely share today. Journalist A. B. Stoddard, Brandon’s daughter, spoke with Shane Harris about her dad’s determination to air the film and what he hoped to achieve. Stoddard is well known for her political commentary and work at The Bulwark. But today, she shares personal memories of her father, his illustrious career, and the legacy of his work. In November of last year, to commemorate the 40th anniversary of “The Day After,” she wrote a column, “The Day My Father Scared America.” Among the works mentioned in this episode:A.B. Stoddard’s column on her dadhttps://plus.thebulwark.com/p/brandon-stoddard-the-day-after Shane’s previous conversation with Nicholas Meyer, who directed “The Day After” https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-day-after-with-nicholas-meyer/id1593674288?i=1000558946928 A.B. Stoddard’s columns for The Bulwarkhttps://substack.com/@abstoddard The catalog of Brandon Stoddard’s work https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0830992/ Brandon Stoddard’s induction in the Television Academy Hall of Fame https://www.emmys.com/bios/brandon-stoddard “The Day After” (on YouTube) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utGRP9Zy1lg Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Jay Venables of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Israeli Supreme Court—in the middle of the war in Gaza—handed down a decision that amounts to a kind of death blow to Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's judicial reform project. Before October 7, judicial overhaul was all that anybody was talking about in Israeli politics—you know, a five-part legislative plan to assert parliamentary control over the judiciary and reduce Israel's checks and balances into a more majoritarian system. Only one part of it passed, and the Supreme Court has now struck it down in a decision that sharply divided the court on some questions and reflected significant unity on others.To discuss the 700-page ruling, we brought back our Israeli judicial overhaul team: Yuval Shany of Hebrew University and Amichai Cohen of Ono Academic College. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with them about what the court did and what the court didn't do, about their doing it in the middle of a war and whether that was truly necessary, and about where the judicial politics of Israel go from here. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yesterday, a panel of judges at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in former President Trump's appeal of Judge Chutkan's denial of his claims of presidential immunity in the Jan. 6 case.On a livestream yesterday afternoon to talk over what happened in every phase of the oral arguments, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower who was in the room for the arguments, and Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff. Anna Bower discussed what is was like in the courtroom where both former President Trump and special counsel Jack Smith were seated. They talked about the merits and jurisdictional questions the judges considered, their impressions about what the judges may be thinking about the case, and how the lawyers performed. They even talked about whether Lawfare was once again first in line, and they looked forward to what happens next.You can watch a video version of their conversation here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Michael J. Gottlieb is a litigation partner at the Willkie law firm. He is a long-time national security lawyer, served in Barack Obama's White House Counsel's office, and used to be the civilian lead on a task force that built rule of law institutions in Afghanistan.Late last year, he won a $148 million dollar judgment against Rudy Giuliani on behalf of election workers Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman. He joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the case, how he and the advocacy group Protect Democracy teamed up to use defamation law to fight disinformation and the big lie, what the use of defamation in this way can and cannot be expected to do, and how he went from building rule of law institutions in Afghanistan to representing people who have had their lives turned upside down by a toxic media ecosystem. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Tuesday, Jan. 9, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is set to hear oral argument in United States v. Trump. Trump, indicted in D.C. for alleged crimes related to election interference, is appealing the trial court’s denial of his motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity and constitutional grounds.Ahead of the hearing, we gathered an all-star team to discuss the merits of Trump’s appeal and how the D.C. Circuit might rule. Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower sat down with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic; Stanton Jones, counsel for American Oversight, which has filed a fascinating amicus brief that questions whether the appeals court has jurisdiction to decide the case in the first place; and Matthew Seligman, counsel for a group of former Republican officials who have filed an amicus brief in opposition to Trump’s claim of immunity. Matthew is also the co-author of a forthcoming book on presidential elections called, “How to Steal a Presidential Election.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower to talk through the week’s big national security news, including:“Hamas, No Más.” A senior Hamas official was recently killed in an attack in Beirut, in what many believe was an operation by Israel—a country whose leaders have pledged to target Hamas’s leaders wherever they might be, though it has not formally acknowledged involvement in this particular attack. But pursuing such action across a border that is already on the edge of becoming a second front in the Gaza conflict has observers nervous. How significant is this operation? Does it risk regional escalation?“Bad for the Immune System.” Just before the holiday, the Supreme Court rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s petition for it to expedite consideration of former President Trump’s claim of immunity to criminal charges. And in the week that’s passed, briefing is already underway—including an argument by an amicus asserting that appeal shouldn’t be allowed at all. What hangs on this case? And how do the courts seem poised to address it?“The Unprincipled Agent Problem.” The Justice Department has leveled additional charges against Sen. Robert Menendez and his wife alleging additional illegal actions in support of Qatar, including some in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Meanwhile, several associates of former President Trump have faced similar charges for alleged work for the same government. What should we make of these powerful public officials and their associates doing work for foreign governments? And is FARA the right tool to address it?For object lessons, Quinta continued to suck up to the estate of Roberto Bolano by endorsing his book “The Savage Detectives.” Scott spilled the beans on one of Denver’s lovely speakeasies, B&GC. And Anna urged folks to try out a Tarot Card reading for the New Year—advice Fox News appears to have taken on former President Trump’s behalf.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on January 4 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower and Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff to discuss all of the Section 3 litigation happening across the country from Colorado to Maine. They talked about where the D.C. case stands and whether the Jan. 6 trial will start on March 4. And they took questions from a live audience.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 11, 2018: Last week, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Gregory Johnsen, a former member of the U.N. Security Council Panel of Experts on Yemen and the author of the book "The Last Refuge: Yemen, Al-Qaeda, and America’s War in Arabia," to do a deep dive on the conflict in Yemen: its origins; its current state; and the role Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United States have played and are likely to play moving forward. Joining Ben and Greg was Daniel Byman, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Center for Middle East Policy and Lawfare’s own Foreign Policy Editor.After Ben and Dan’s conversation with Greg, Brookings Fellow Molly Reynolds and Lawfare's Scott R. Anderson sat down for a conversation about Yemen-related legislation that is currently churning on Capitol Hill, and what it may mean for the future of U.S. involvement in the conflict there.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, at COP28 in Dubai, the Republic of the Marshall Islands unveiled its sweeping national climate adaptation plan, the multi-year product of government officials interviewing thousands of Marshallese residents across the country’s dozens of coral atolls. The plan is ambitious and groundbreaking because it has to be. As John Silk, foreign minister of the Marshall Islands, said in September, “We call it our national adaptation plan, but it is really our survival plan.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Jake Bittle, a staff writer at Grist who covers climate impacts and adaptation and the author of a recent book about climate migration called “The Great Displacement,” about this very plan, which Jake obtained ahead of the annual climate conference. They discussed what makes this particular climate adaptation plan revolutionary, the thorny geopolitics of climate financing, and the unimaginable, unquantifiable loss that might occur should the worst case scenarios come to fruition for the Marshallese. But they also talked about why, despite its dire warnings and existential subject matter, the plan’s creators ultimately see it as an optimistic document. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From the protests in Brazil initially focused on bus fares to the protests in Hong Kong seeking to stop an extradition bill to the protests across the Middle East now collectively referred to as the "Arab Spring," the political and economic mass demonstrations from 2010 to 2020 made it a decade of public protest like no other. Yet the vast majority of these efforts failed to bring about their desired changes--and many of them actually led to the opposite of what they wanted. Vincent Bevins, author of the new book If We Burn: The Mass Protest Decade and the Missing Revolution, has chronicled this decade with stories from his on-the-ground reporting and extensive interviews with activists in ten countries around the globe.David Priess spoke with Vincent about why mass protests during this decade so often fell short of their objectives, the principle of horizontalism, the role of social media in mobilization and action, and other themes as they relate to the mass protests in Brazil, Turkey, Hong Kong, Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Syria, South Korea, and other countries.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book If We Burn: The Mass Protest Decade and the Missing Revolution by Vincent BevinsThe movie The CandidateThe book From Mobilization to Revolution by Charles TillyThe book Minor Detail by Adania ShibliThe book Bourdieu's Secret Admirer in the Caucasus by Georgi DerluguianChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas is provoking heated debates about which side is in the right. Each accuses the other of things like war crimes. Oftentimes, they’re expressing a political or moral judgment—but the fact is, these are also legal terms.So for this discussion, we’re going to step back from the debates and try to take a dispassionate look at the law that applies here—international humanitarian law, or IHL.To do that, Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Gabor Rona, who previously served as the legal adviser for the International Committee for the Red Cross. They talked about what IHL has to say about the most heated debates of this conflict, including the high number of civilian casualties in Gaza and Hamas’s use of human shields. They talked about the gaps in the law. And they talked about whether the law even matters here. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In May 2023, Montana passed a new law that would ban the use of TikTok within the state starting on January 1, 2024. But as of today, TikTok is still legal in the state of Montana—thanks to a preliminary injunction issued by a federal district judge, who found that the Montana law likely violated the First Amendment. In Texas, meanwhile, another federal judge recently upheld a more limited ban against the use of TikTok on state-owned devices. What should we make of these rulings, and how should we understand the legal status of efforts to ban TikTok?We’ve discussed the question of TikTok bans and the First Amendment before on the Lawfare Podcast, when Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein and Matt Perault, Director of the Center on Technology Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill, sat down with Ramya Krishnan, a staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, and Mary-Rose Papandrea, the Samuel Ashe Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law. In light of the Montana and Texas rulings, Matt and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic decided to bring the gang back together and talk about where the TikTok bans stand with Ramya and Mary-Rose, on this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to our annual “Ask Us Anything” episode, a hallowed Lawfare tradition. Every news alert in 2023 seemed to bring new questions. But fear not, because Lawfare has answers. Lawfare senior editors answered listener-submitted questions on the Israel-Gaza War, military aid to Ukraine, the Trump trials, gag orders against the former president, the presidential pardon ability, violence against elected officials, efforts to combat corruption, and more. What a year! Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 27, 2014: A few weeks ago, Benjamin Wittes began listening to a podcast called Hardcore History, which is the brainchild of a fellow named Dan Carlin. Carlin was doing a series of episodes on World War I, and Hardcore History is—let's just say—a different sort of podcast. The episodes are very long, very involved, and to Ben at least, completely riveting. Ben can't recommend it highly enough. Carlin, a former radio talk show host, also runs a podcast called Common Sense, which focuses on contemporary political issues and features Carlin's eclectic political views—many of which Ben disagrees with intensely. Literally millions of people are downloading Carlin's lectures on World War I and other major events in mostly military history. Ben caught up with Carlin this week to discuss the World War I series, Hardcore History more generally, and his views on matters surveillance, ISIS, and overseas intervention.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott rang in the New Year with co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes by discussing some listener-submitted topics, including:What does the AUKUS deal mean for the Five Eyes intelligence relationship?How can courts enforce a gag order against former President Trump?What would a President Nikki Haley mean for the Republican Party’s foreign policy?Which is better, wizards or fighters?Could anything stop former President Trump from appointing a cabinet of loyalists if elected back into the White House?How is misinformation impacting public understandings of the Gaza conflict?What advice would you give to folks beginning law school—and those married to them?Could we just do away with hard printouts of classified information altogether?How will China’s economic and demographic challenges impact its decision-making on Taiwan?What does Prighozin’s death mean for Wagner in Africa?What was your most (or least) favorite media of the year?As for object lessons, they shared several sent in by listeners, including:The video game Pentiment, a murder mystery set in Renaissance Bavaria;The book “Palestine 1936: The Great Revolt and the Roots of Middle East Conflict” by Oren Kessler;The “anti-reactionary conservative news site” The Dispatch, including its podcasts Advisory Opinions, The Remnant, and The Dispatch Podcast;The book “Three Dangerous Men” by Seth Jones, examining military leaders in China, Iran, and Russia;The book “Killers of the Flower Moon” by David Grann (but not the movie);The podcast “The Prince” about the rise of Xi Jinping (along with The Economist’s other phenomenal podcast work);The book “Listen Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People” by Thomas Frank;The new book “For the People, For the Country” by John Ragosta, a political biography of Patrick Henry;And LinkedIn as the hot new social networking site!Thank you to everyone for listening to Rational Security and supporting Lawfare throughout the year. We hope you enjoy a Happy New Year, and we will be back in your feeds in 2024!Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 9, 2019: From the increasing development of autonomous weapons systems to the expansion of the traditional battlefield to cyber and outer space, the evolution of warfare invites ethical and legal questions about what the future holds. In November 2018, Arnold & Porter's Veterans and Affiliates Leadership Organization hosted a panel discussion to explain what warfare will be like for the military veterans of the future.Former Air Force and Army general counsel and current Arnold & Porter partner Chuck Blanchard moderated a conversation with American University law professor Ken Anderson, Emory law professor Laurie Blank, and Jamie Morin, vice president of Defense System Operations at The Aerospace Corporation and a director of the Center for Space Policy and Strategy.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Former President Trump’s prosecution for mishandling classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate has brought an old law back to the front pages—the Espionage Act.Enacted more than a century ago, parts of that law allowing for the prosecution of those who mishandle or unduly disclose sensitive national security information, have helped provide the legal infrastructure for the modern classification system used to protect our country's most important secrets. And by some accounts, to limit debate over some of its most controversial policies.In his new book, “State of Silence,” George Mason University History Professor Sam Lebovic provides a fast-paced and eminently readable account of the Espionage Act, from its early-20th-century origins, through the various twists and turns that have led it to be applied to government leakers and former presidents alike. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lebovic to discuss the unlikely evolution of the Espionage Act, the role that it has come to play in our national security system, and how it might be changed to better reflect our democratic values.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, we're taking time off for the holidays, so we reached into the Chatter archives for one of our favorites.In this episode from January 13, 2022, Shane Harris and David Priess teamed up to talk with John Sipher, a former senior intelligence officer who has gone Hollywood. With his partners at Spycraft Entertainment, John is bringing compelling and, yes, accurate stories about espionage to the screen. Before working in the entertainment industry, he spent 28 years in the CIA, where he served multiple overseas tours as a chief of station. Shane, David, and John talked about their favorite spy movies, the fine line between the espionage and action-adventure genres, and the kinds of stories they’d like to see more of.  Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo, with engineering assistance from Ian Enright. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Between 1865 and 1872, the first iteration of the Ku Klux Klan conducted a reign of terror across the former Confederate States, harassing, intimidating, and murdering freedpeople and their white allies. As violence spread with impunity across the South, Congress, at President Ulysses S. Grant’s urging, passed three Enforcement Acts, which radically expanded the federal government's ability to protect individuals from violence when their state governments could or would not. Lawfare Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Fergus Bordewich, author of “Klan War: Ulysses S. Grant and the Battle to Save Reconstruction,” to discuss how the Grant administration fought the first domestic terrorist organization the federal government had ever faced. They also talked about the political terrorism conducted by the Klan in that era and what we can learn from that violent period of American history.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court last month heard oral arguments in United States v. Rahimi, in which the Court will decide the constitutionality of a federal law that criminalizes the possession of firearms by individuals on whom state courts have imposed domestic violence protective orders. This case came to the Court following its June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In that case, the Court determined that whether a law violates the Second Amendment depends on whether there is a “representative historical analogue” for the contemporary law. Amanda Tyler, the Shannon Cecil Turner Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, argued in a recent article in Lawfare that the many laws disarming loyalists that existed at the time of the Founding serve as a set of “historical analogues” required by Bruen to demonstrate the constitutionality of the statute at issue in Rahimi—a claim which has been disputed by Rahimi’s lawyers. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Tyler to discuss the Rahimi case, the nature of the Founding-era laws that stripped loyalists of their firearms, whether loyalists were members of the American political community, why that question matters for the Court’s ruling in Rahimi, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court during World War II issued some of the most notorious opinions in its history, including the Japanese exclusion case, Korematsu v. United States, and the Nazi saboteur military commission case, Ex parte Quirin. For a fresh take on these and related cases and a broader perspective on the Supreme Court during World War II, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Cliff Sloan, a professor at Georgetown Law Center and a former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, to discuss his new book, which is called “The Court at War: FDR, His Justices, and the World They Made.”  They discussed how the Court's decisions during World War II were informed by the very close personal bonds of affection that most of the justices had with President Roosevelt and by the justices’ intimate attachment to and involvement with the war effort. They also discussed the fascinating internal deliberations in Korematsu, Quirin, and other momentous cases, and the puzzle of why the same court that issued these decisions also, during the same period, issued famous rights-expanding decisions in the areas of reproductive freedom, voting rights, and freedom of speech.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Cyber Fellow Eugenia Lostri to talk through the big national security news waking us up from our long winter’s nap this week, including:“Rocky Mountain, Bye.” Colorado’s Supreme Court has bid goodbye to former President Donald Trump’s 2024 candidacy (for now, at least), holding in a 4-3 ruling that he is disqualified as a candidate by virtue of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Will this ruling hold? And where will it go from here?“Houthis to Sea, so Rudely, a Wop Bop a Loo Bop a Wop Bam Boom.” Attacks by Yemen-based (and Iran-backed) Houthi rebels have led major shippers to avoid the Red Sea, dealing a serious blow to global commerce. But the United States and a coalition of allies has announced a new maritime effort—the (perhaps too) aptly named Operation Prosperity Guardian—to keep trade flowing. What will this military operation look like? And what will it mean for the global economy?“Not So Bueno(s) Aires?” Argentina has a new president in the form of eccentric populist economist and literal dogfather Javier Milei. What does his election mean for the future of the country? We have a live dispatch from Buenos Aires to talk it over.For object lessons, Quinta recommended Jennifer Egan’s 2022 classic “A Visit From the Goon Squad” and her latest “The Candy House.” Scott shared his preferred recipe for mulled wine and the secret ingredient: star anise. Natalie shared a wealth of new materials celebrating civil rights leader Bayard Rustin, including a new film Rustin, as well as a recent profile in The New Yorker. And Eugenia gave the people what they want with her endorsement of the Dragon Age series of games.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's part two of our Lawfare year-end event. Yesterday, we brought you the headliner conversation with Adam Kinzinger. Today, it's three panels of Lawfare insiders talking about the year to come and the year that's passed. We did a panel on democracy, the Trump trials, and related matters. We did a panel on cybersecurity, cyber defense, and AI. And of course, we did a panel on foreign policy and the various crises that are overtaking American foreign policy.You can watch a video version of their conversation here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” this one recorded on December 21 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower and special guest Anthony Michael Kreis from the Georgia State University College of Law.They talked about the 11th Circuit's denial of Mark Meadows’s removal request in Fulton County, about why the order may have worrisome secondary effects, and of course, about that decision from the Colorado Supreme Court blocking Trump from the 2024 Republican primary ballot. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The other day before a live audience, we had our Lawfare year-end extravaganza. It was two hours long, so we've broken it up for purposes of the podcast. In this episode, you'll hear Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes interview Adam Kinzinger, former representative and member of the Jan. 6 committee, who headlined the event. They talked about the big national security stories of 2023, both domestically and abroad. They talked about what to expect in 2024, and how the international stories are linked to American domestic politics and dysfunction. You can watch a video version of their conversation here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Secure by Design means different things to different people. As part of Lawfare’s ongoing project to understand what Secure by Design might mean in practice, we are trying to identify the open questions—areas where research or inquiry might help our collective understanding of the concept and how it might work. Lawfare Contributing Editor Paul Rosenzweig sat down with three Senior Advisers to CISA—Lauren Zabierek, Jack Cable, and Bob Lord—who work on the cutting edge of SbD design and implementation, to get their thoughts on research that would be of ongoing value to their efforts to define an SbD standard.You can watch a video version of their conversation here.For more information, including the resources mentioned in this episode:CISA, U.S. and International Partners Announce Updated Secure by Design Principles Joint Guide | CISACISA, NSA, FBI and International Cybersecurity Authorities Publish Guide on The Case for Memory Safe Roadmaps | CISABlog: The Next Chapter of Secure by Design | CISAExpanded Secure by Design Publication: Secure-by-Design | CISAWhite Paper: https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/resources/secure-by-design (English and Spanish versions available)Blog on Memory Safety: The Urgent Need for Memory Safety in Software Products | CISAApplying Secure By Design to events : Applying “Secure By Design” Thinking to Events in the News | CISARFI on secure software attestation form: CISA Requests Comment on Draft Secure Software Development Attestation Form | CISADirector Jen Easterly on updated Secure by Design in Singapore (start 2:12): SICW Opening Ceremony & SICW High-Panels - Opening Plenary - YouTubeRosenzweig on Auto/Cyber Liability: https://tcg-website-prod.azurewebsites.net/the-evolving-landscape-of-cybersecurity-liability/Unsafe At Any Speed: CISA's Plan to Foster Tech Ecosystem Security (youtube.com)Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Modern representative democracy was born in darkness. Transparency in representative bodies can spur unintended consequences for freedom, while secrecy in those bodies can lead to optimal outcomes for the public.These are uncomfortable truths that emerge from the history of the US and French revolutionary experiences. Many of our governance challenges today, from malign misinformation to persistent leaks to skepticism toward authority, derive in part from the fact that fundamental issues about how to manage openness in a representative deomcracy remain unresolved.David Priess chatted with Katlyn Carter, assistant professor of history at Notre Dame and author of the new book Democracy in Darkness: Secrecy and Transparency in the Age of Revolutions, about the concepts of reflective representation and insulated representation, how to understand and research the will of the people, the Continental Congress's secrecy, the closed-door policy of the Constitutional Convention, the consequences of its secrecy for the doctrine of originalism, the crucial cases of the Jay Treaty and the Alien and Sedition Acts, James Madison's evolving views about representation and openness, the difficult realization that open dialogue and debate do not always lead to truth, and Thomas Jefferson's complicated legacy.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In an end-of-the-day ruling on Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court struck Donald Trump from the Republican primary ballot on grounds that he was disqualified for the presidency as a result of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The decision now appears to be fast-tracked to Supreme Court consideration that could obliterate it or make it apply nationally. To go over all the twists and turns, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Gerard Magliocca, a professor at the University of Indiana, who wrote a key law review article on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. They talked about the Colorado decision—where it's strong, and where it's less strong. They talked about how this is going to land at the Supreme Court—which parts the justices are likely to accept, and which parts they're going to pick apart. They talked about the politics of it all, and they talked about what it means to engage in insurrection.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2021, the Wall Street Journal published a monster scoop: a series of articles about Facebook’s inner workings, which showed that employees within the famously secretive company had raised alarms about potential harms caused by Facebook’s products. Now, Jeff Horwitz, the reporter behind that scoop, has a new book out, titled “Broken Code”—which dives even deeper into the documents he uncovered from within the company. He’s one of the most rigorous reporters covering Facebook, now known as Meta.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Jeff along with Matt Perault, the Director of the Center on Technology Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill—and also someone with close knowledge of Meta from his own time working at the company. They discussed Jeff’s reporting and debated what his findings tell us about how Meta functions as a company and how best to understand its responsibilities for harms traced back to its products.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Bryan Vorndran is Assistant Director of the FBI's Cyber Division, a position he's held since around March 2021. Prior to that, he was the special agent in charge in New Orleans, and he's worked in Afghanistan and on the Joint Terrorism Task Force at the Washington Field Office.David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Bryan to talk about his career trajectory, the FBI's top cyber challenges, the Bureau's relationships with other agencies and private sector entities, and the challenges posed by the People's Republic of China. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conflict in Gaza may be approaching a turning point. An increasingly frustrated Biden administration has reportedly told Israeli officials that the military campaign needs to wind up within weeks, while even some Israeli officials have suggested that Hamas is on the verge of defeat. But as the physical and human devastation in Gaza continues to mount, the question of what comes after the conflict ends looms just over the horizon, without anyone offering a clear answer. To talk through the state of the conflict and what might come next, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Joel Braunold, the Managing Director of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace—someone who has followed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict closely for decades, and who has often played a key supporting role in related negotiations. They talked about the state of Israel’s military campaign, how it is impacting Israeli and Palestinian politics, and the challenges of reaching a new status quo that stands any chance of meeting the demands of those parties who are most directly affected. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conflict in Gaza may be approaching a turning point. An increasingly frustrated Biden administration has reportedly told Israeli officials that the military campaign needs to wind up within weeks, while even some Israeli officials have suggested that Hamas is on the verge of defeat. But as the physical and human devastation in Gaza continues to mount, the question of what comes after the conflict ends looms just over the horizon, without anyone offering a clear answer. To talk through the state of the conflict and what might come next, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Joel Braunold, the Managing Director of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace—someone who has followed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict closely for decades, and who has often played a key supporting role in related negotiations. They talked about the state of Israel’s military campaign, how it is impacting Israeli and Palestinian politics, and the challenges of reaching a new status quo that stands any chance of meeting the demands of those parties who are most directly affected. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to talk through the week’s big national security news, including:“You’ll Shoot Your Five Eyes Out with a Bibi Gun.” From Ukraine to Gaza, some of the biggest controversies surrounding U.S. foreign policy hinge on the assistance—including weapons and intelligence—that the United States provides to its allies. What makes these relationships so complicated? “The Sock-It Docket.” Late last week, Special Counsel Jack Smith executed a power move, bringing former President Trump’s appeal of the denial of his claim of absolute presidential immunity directly to the Supreme Court — through what is often called the “rocket docket”—and citing precedents from the Nixon era suggesting the Supreme Court should resolve the issue within weeks. What does this move tell us—and how likely is Smith to win his case?“Netanya-who?” President Biden’s bear hug of the Israeli prime minister may be loosening, as he has reportedly told donors that Netanyahu must go if Israel is to retain international support. How serious a move is this? And what might it mean for the conflict in Gaza?For object lessons, Quinta continued to show off her bookshelf by recommending Jeff Horwitz’s “Broken Code.” Scott flagged for listeners that “White Christmas” is, in fact, the best holiday movie and no one should try to argue otherwise. And Tyler endorsed Julie Byrne’s album from earlier this year, “The Greater Wings.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another edition of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on Thursday before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and special guest Steve Vladeck from the University of Texas School of Law. They discussed Jack Smith's petition to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari “before judgment” on the question of presidential immunity. They talked about the Court's decision to weigh in on Fischer v. United States and the potential impact on Trump's criminal cases and the other Jan. 6 cases that involved the same statute. They talked about whether Trump's trial in D.C. will be delayed by the Supreme Court's consideration of the immunity question. They talked about the status of the civil suit by Georgia election workers against Rudy Giuliani, and they checked in to see what is new in Fulton County. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 29, 2017: On December 31, 2017, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act will sunset. While U.S. officials insist that the provision authorizes critical intelligence gathering, it remains an open question whether Congress will reauthorize the law as it exists, pass it with amendments, or allow it to lapse altogether. In this week's podcast, Susan Hennessey sits down with FBI General Counsel Jim Baker and the Bureau's Executive Assistant Director of the National Security Branch Carl Ghattas to discuss the FBI's perspective on the legal and operational elements of Section 702.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

According to the resolution signed at the end of the 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), or COP28 for short, fossil fuels have finally been sentenced to a slow and painful death. This year’s global climate summit, held in the United Arab Emirates, ended with an overtime session that resulted with the nations agreeing to transition away from fossil fuels for the first time in COP history. But what does this really mean, and is the language as strong as it could have been? Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han talked to Director of the Center for Climate and Security and Lawfare Contributing Editor Erin Sikorsky about the final deal language, what else happened at COP28, and the geopolitical implications of the clean energy transition. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the summer of 1944, a group of artists, visual designers and sound engineers--all of them GIs--began a series of secret operations in occupied France. Their mission: to deceive German forces about the location and size of U.S. military units, using a combination of inflatable vehicles, sound recordings, and “actors” posing as officers. The ranks of the “Ghost Army” included future stars of the worlds of art and design, including Ellsworth Kelly, Bill Blass, Arthur Singer, Victor Dowd, Art Kane, and Jack Masey. Journalist Rick Beyer has chronicled their ingenious exploits in a book and a documentary. December marks the 80th anniversary of the order that created the unit, which remained secret for decades. Shane Harris talked with Beyer about its creation, its success, and the ghost army’s role in the storied history of intelligence deceptions. Among the works mentioned in this episode:The Ghost Army bookhttps://www.chroniclebooks.com/products/ghost-army-of-world-war-ii The Ghost Army documentary https://shop.pbs.org/WC3752.html The Ghost Army Legacy Project https://ghostarmy.org/ Smithsonian magazine feature  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-the-ghost-army-of-wwii-used-art-to-deceive-the-nazis-180980336/ The National WWII Museum https://www.nationalww2museum.org/visit/exhibits/traveling-exhibits/ghost-army-combat-con-artists-world-war-ii Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ben Saul is the Challis Professor of International Law at the University of Sydney, Australia, whose internationally recognized work has focused specifically on the intersection of human rights, terrorism, and international law. The United Nations Human Rights Council voted to appoint Saul as the newest Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, which has become one of the most visible and urgent special rapporteur mandates at the Human Rights Council. He began his three-year tenure, which can be extended to six years, on November 1, 2023. Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han sat down with Saul for an interview about his priorities for his tenure, the intellectual frameworks and perspectives he brings to his role, and to get his perspective as Special Rapporteur on the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You may have heard of Javier Milei, Argentina’s new president, thanks to some of his eccentricities, like his five cloned dogs or his reliance on a chainsaw prop to illustrate the need to cut public expenditure. But Milei was able to harness the dissatisfaction with a system that has left the country with 150% inflation and over 40% of the population under the line of poverty. Now, the self described anarcho-capitalist libertarian will attempt to turn the economy around with shocking fiscal adjustment.To discuss this inflection point in Argentina, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri spoke with Ana Iparraguirre, a partner at consulting firm GBAO and a frequent commentator on leading Latin American media outlets. They talked about Milei’s rise to power, if and how he can deliver on his campaign promises, and what that would even mean for the Argentinian people.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

FISA Section 702 is set to expire on Dec. 31, 2023. Last week, two bills were marked up by two different House committees—one in the House Judiciary Committee and one in the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. To talk about these very different approaches to FISA Section 702 reauthorization and reform, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Preston Marquis, a JD candidate at Harvard Law School and a former analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency; Molly Reynolds, Senior Editor at Lawfare; and Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare’s Editor-in-Chief. They discussed some of the key differences between these bills, the abnormal politics surrounding this reauthorization process, and an unusual floor procedure called Queen of the Hill that may be used for consideration of both of these bills.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Senate last week failed to move forward the national security supplemental, which includes a large package of aid for Ukraine. The holdup? Migration at the southern border and Republican insistence that the administration and Democrats will have to swallow major policy changes in order to get the Ukraine aid through. Meanwhile, the mood in Kyiv is a little down. The counteroffensive did not go as planned, the U.S. aid situation and the European commitment to Ukraine is alarming, and domestic politics are returning after a hiatus during the first couple years of the war.  To chew over the state of Ukraine and its support from the United States, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Eric Ciaramella of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a former CIA Ukraine analyst, and Molly Reynolds, Lawfare Senior Editor and Congressional Guru. They talked about the state of the Ukraine aid package in Congress, about whether a deal on the border is possible, about whether such a deal could pass the House, and about Ciaramella's recent trip to Kyiv and the mood there as Congress dithers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, co-hosts Quinta and Scott were joined by co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes to talk over the week’s big national security news, including:“Stalled and Appalled.” Ukraine’s counteroffensive to try and reclaim Russia-held parts of eastern Ukraine appears to have stalled, triggering a degree of finger-pointing on both sides of the Atlantic—just as U.S. and European support for their military campaign appears to be waning. What does this mean for the next stage of this conflict?“Parting the Red Sea.” Since the start of the war in Gaza, U.S. and allied diplomatic and military presences have come under attack by Iran-backed proxies throughout the Middle East. Now the Iran-backed Houthi faction in Yemen is targeting commercial shipping in the Red Sea with purported Israeli ties. What’s motivating these actions? And how do they change the regional security picture?“One Day Soon, I’m Gonna Tell My Goons, About the Blassingame.” Former President Donald Trump suffered two big legal losses in cases relating to Jan. 6 this past week, as both the D.C. Circuit in the civil suit against him and the trial court in his criminal prosecution held that he was not immune for prosecution by virtue of being the president. What will these decisions mean moving forward on the civil and criminal fronts?For object lessons, Quinta shared an amazing development in the Menendez case. Scott pulled a musical hat-trick and endorsed the newish venue The Atlantis, the phenomenal Lydia Loveless (who he just saw there), and (since it is December) Ingrid Michaelson’s holiday album Songs for the Season—and specifically the sob-inducingly melancholy song, “Happy, Happy Christmas.” And Ben plugged the Romanian Madrigal Choir show he attended at the National Cathedral while also logrolling for the new (non-Lawfare) podcast feature he rolled out on his substack Dog Shirt Daily and related podcast “Read with Me,” which features readings of major filings and opinions in the Trump trials. Also, we are beginning preparations for our end-of-year listener-submitted episode! If you have a topic you want us to cover, a question you want us to answer, or an object lesson you want to share, send it along to us at rationalsecurity@lawfaremedia.org no later than December 18!Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another edition of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on Thursday before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes, Senior Editor Roger Parloff, and Legal Fellow Anna Bower to discuss a range of matters, from Judge Chutkan’s denial of Trump's motions to dismiss his D.C. criminal case, to Trump's filing seeking to stay the D.C. case in its entirety, the lack of movement in the D.C. Circuit from its gag order, and where the various 14th Amendment Section 3 suits seeking to ban Trump from the 2024 ballot stand around the country. They also dug into updates from Fulton County and talked about what happened in particular at the six-hour hearing on Dec. 1 that has gotten surprisingly little attention. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From November 6, 2013: On October 25, 2013, the Hoover Institution held a day-long media colloquium out at Stanford University for a first-rate group of journalists focused on national security legal issues and the work of Hoover’s Jean Perkins Task Force on National Security and Law. The first session of the day, Ben’s talk on Speaking the Law, ran as episode of the podcast on Sunday. The second session, the subject of this episode, was a talk by Matt and Ken about autonomous weapons and the calls for a preemptive ban in international law on so-called "killer robots." The session has been edited both for length and because not all of the journalists consented to having their remarks made public.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, former Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger passed away. To assess his legacy, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Graham Allison, the Douglas Dillon Professor of Government at Harvard University. Allison knew Kissinger well. He first met Kissinger in 1965 when he was a student in Kissinger's class at Harvard. And Allison worked with Kissinger for decades, right up until the end of Kissinger's life, when he and Kissinger coauthored an essay published in October on arms control for artificial intelligence, perhaps Kissinger's last essay. Allison and Goldsmith discussed Kissinger's accomplishments as a statesman, his cast of mind and long intellectual productivity, his engagement with history as a guide to international diplomacy, and his particular brand of realism. They also discussed Kissinger's failures and mistakes and what Kissinger was most worried about at the end of his life.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

World War I was a seminal event for American national security and foreign policy, as the United States deployed nearly two million soldiers and sailors to Europe and engaged in the most intense overseas combat in its history up to that point. Yet the development of modern American intelligence just before and during the war, and even the magnitude of the war itself, have been largely forgotten by the US public.David Priess spoke with historian and former intelligence officer Mark Stout, author of the new book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence, about early steps toward peacetime US military intelligence in the 1880s and 1890s, the importance of Arthur Wagner and his late 19th century textbook about information collection, the intelligence impact on and from the Spanish-American War and the Philippine insurgency, how the war in Europe spurred intelligence advances in the mid-1910s, German sabotage in the United States, how General John Pershing and the American Expeditionary Forces used intelligence in combat, the growth of domestic intelligence during the war, the scholarly group gathered by President Woodrow Wilson called "The Inquiry," and why World War I generally fails to resonate with Amercians today.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence by Mark StoutThe book Classified: Secrecy and the State in Modern Britain by Christopher MoranThe movie Gone with the Wind (1939)The book Wasteland: The Great War and the Origins of Modern Horror by W. Scott PooleThe Chatter podcast episode The JFK Assassination and Conspiracy Culture with Gerald PosnerThe book Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy by John le CarréThe movie Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (2011)Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Megan Nadolski and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Watching the footage of the attack on the U.S. Capitol on the morning of Jan. 6, 2021, Bradley Onishi thought to himself, “If I hadn’t left evangelicalism, would I have been there?” In his book entitled, “Preparing for War: The Extremist History of White Christian Nationalism and What Comes Next,” Onishi offers a sobering historical account of the origins and development of White Christian nationalism in the United States and its offshoots. From the unique perspective of a former insider, Onishi explains how the decades-long campaign of White Christian nationalism in the United States culminated in the Jan. 6 attack. Lawfare Associate Editor Katherine Pompilio sat down with Onishi—a scholar of religion and co-host of the Straight White American Jesus Podcast—to discuss his personal experience as a former White Christian nationalist and how it informed his writing of the book. They also discussed culture wars and the myth of the Christian nation, the elections of Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, Jan. 6 rioters and religious symbols at the riot, how Donald Trump fits into all of this, and more. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A little over a month ago, President Biden issued a sweeping executive order on artificial intelligence (AI) covering a broad set of AI issues, such as privacy, transparency, the development of biological weapons, and many more. The order hands out expansive directives to several U.S. government agencies and private industry, which the Biden administration hopes will help the U.S. lead the globe in AI development in a safe and sustainable manner. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Bill Wright, Global Head of Government Affairs at Elastic—a leading search company—to discuss, from the perspective of an industry insider, what the executive order means for tech companies that rely on AI and the relationship between tech companies and the U.S. government. Is collaboration among companies in the competitive AI space possible? Which aspects of the order could help smaller companies keep up? Will the order let companies dictate their processes for complying with the order’s broad objectives?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Friday, two courts weighed in on the question of presidential immunity. First, Judge Chutkan of the DC District Court ruled that Trump is not immune from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s criminal prosecution for his conduct on Jan. 6. In the second, the DC Circuit Court ruled that Trump is not immune from a civil suit brought by members of Congress and Capitol Police officers, also relating to his conduct on Jan. 6.To talk through the decisions, Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff along with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes. They discussed the nuances of both opinions, how the analysis is consistent and how it is different, and what each case implies about the other—and what comes next.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Is the Fourth Amendment doing any work anymore? In a forthcoming article entitled “Government Purchases of Private Data,” Matthew Tokson, a professor at the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law, details how, in recent years, federal and state agencies have begun to purchase location information and other consumer data, as government attorneys have mostly concluded that purchasing data is a valid way to bypass Fourth Amendment restrictions. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Matthew to discuss this article, where he attempts to bring this constitutional evasion to light. They talked about the two main arguments offered for why the purchase of private data does not violate the Fourth Amendment, his responses to these arguments, and the recommendations he makes to courts, legislators, and government agencies to address the Fourth Amendment and privacy concerns surrounding government purchases of private data.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, a contentedly full post-Thanksgiving Scott and Quinta sat down with two Lawfare colleagues—Senior Editor and Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Molly Reynolds and Cyber Fellow Eugenia Lostri—to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:“Showdown with an Only O.K. Rationale.” The House and Senate are preparing for a showdown over national security priorities, with assistance for Ukraine (and Israel and border security) hanging in the balance. Where does the debate seem likely to go from here—and what will the global ramifications be?“Bringing Down the @SamA.” OpenAI, the non-profit(?) behind ChatGPT, has had a chaotic few weeks, with its board ousting CEO Sam Altman on the apparent grounds that he was not taking AI safety concerns seriously enough, only for the vast majority of organization’s employees to threaten to resign unless he was brought back—a step the board took, just before most of its members resigned. What do these events tell us about the state of the AI industry?“Carpe Ceasefire.” A fragile pause in hostilities has emerged centered on the exchange of Israeli hostages held by Hamas for imprisoned Palestinians—momentum the Biden administration is reportedly hoping to build on. Yet calls for a permanent ceasefire continue amidst mounting civilian casualties and humanitarian needs, and there remains no clear plan for a post-war Gaza. How long will the pause last? What happens when hostilities resume?For object lessons, Quinta recommended the 1990s classic “Distant Star” by Robert Bolaño. Scott gave his Thanksgiving gold star to Eric Kim’s creamy mac and cheese recipe. Molly leaned into her love for local NPR affiliates and recommended WGBH’s podcast “The Big Dig,” focusing on Boston’s legendary highway project. And secret gamer nerd Eugenia recommended a compelling video game that even parents of toddlers have time to tackle, What Remains of Edith Finch.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another edition of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on Thursday before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and special guest Kyle Cheney of Politico, to talk about Scott Perry's text messages that were newly revealed in a filing in D.C. District Court, about happenings with New York gag orders and D.C. gag orders, about Section 3 of the 14th Amendment cases, and about Anna's story about the Georgia Bureau of Investigation’s report in Coffee County and how much it sucked. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 25, 2018: The United States has become the global leader in both defense and private-sector AI. Inevitably, this has led to an environment in which adversary and ally governments alike may seek to identify and steal AI information—in other words, AI has become intelligence, and those who work in AI have become potential sources and assets. And with intelligence, comes counterintelligence.Jim Baker, a Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution and former FBI General Counsel, is part-way through a series of essays for Lawfare on the links between counterintelligence and AI, two parts of which have already been published (Part I and Part II). On Monday, Jim sat down with Benjamin Wittes to discuss his work on the subject. They talked about how to understand AI as an intelligence asset, how we might protect this valuable asset against a range of threats from hostile foreign actors, and how we can protect ourselves against the threat from AI in the hands of adversaries.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Anna Bower is a Legal Fellow at Lawfare and our Fulton County Correspondent, and has been digging into the weird events in Coffee County in the aftermath of the 2020 election. Her latest tome on the subject is entitled “What the GBI Missed in Coffee County,” and is about the Georgia state investigation, the report on which clocks in at almost 400 pages but is a great deal less impressive than it may seem at first glance.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Anna to talk about the GBI's investigation of the Coffee County caper. What did the GBI do? What didn't they do? Did they add any new information? They actually did—but they also left out a whole lot that any reasonable investigator would want to look at.A video version of this conversation is available on Lawfare's YouTube channel here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Peter Strzok is a former United States Federal Bureau of Investigation agent. He was the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's Counterintelligence Division and led the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. He speaks with Ben Wittes about the numerous places he has called home and a career spent in counterintelligence.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Israel’s military response to Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre has raised deep concern from international legal observers and the general public. The IDF’s tactics have been described as “disproportionate,” and not taking sufficient care to avoid killing civilians or damaging civilian infrastructure, as the law of armed conflict requires.When it comes to incidental casualties in particular, Mark Lattimer, Executive Director of Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights, recently argued on Lawfare’s pages that Israel’s tolerance for civilian deaths seems to surpass even that of the U.S. and U.K.’s in the war against ISIS. Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han talked to him about the case study he used to make this point—an analysis of Israel’s decision to carry out airstrikes in the Jabalia Refugee Camp in October. They compared that to what happened in the Battle of Mosul in 2014, and then got into the bigger differences between Israel’s war against Hamas and the war against ISIS. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably heard a great deal over the last year about generative AI and how it’s going to reshape various aspects of our society. That includes elections. With one year until the 2024 U.S. presidential election, we thought it would be a good time to step back and take a look at how generative AI might and might not make a difference when it comes to the political landscape. Luckily, Matt Perault and Scott Babwah Brennen of the UNC Center on Technology Policy have a new report out on just that subject, examining generative AI and political ads.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic and Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Matt and Scott to talk through the potential risks and benefits of generative AI when it comes to political advertising. Which concerns are overstated, and which are worth closer attention as we move toward 2024? How should policymakers respond to new uses of this technology in the context of elections?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, following Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack on Israel, President Biden announced that his administration would ask Congress for “an unprecedented support package for Israel’s defense,” totaling $14.3 billion. Such a package would supplement the defense aid Israel already receives from the U.S. According to Jonathan Guyer in Vox, “Israel has received about $3 billion annually, adjusted for inflation, for the last 50 years, and is the largest historical recipient of US security aid.” But with civilian casualties in Gaza mounting, including the reported killing of thousands of Palestinian children, likely with weapons of U.S. origin, a recent article in Foreign Affairs by Brian Finucane asks, “Is Washington Responsible for What Israel Does With American Weapons?” To talk through that essay, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Brian, a Senior Adviser at the International Crisis Group and former attorney adviser in the Office of the Legal Adviser at the U.S. State Department, as well as Josh Paul, a former Director in the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, which oversees U.S. arms transfers, who resigned in protest over the U.S. government’s provision of weapons to Israel for use in the conflict in Gaza. They discussed the scale and process of U.S. weapons transfers, the domestic and international law that govern these transfers, and whether the U.S. is complicit and liable for war crimes committed with its weaponry. They also discussed why it would be a mistake to rely solely on the law of war to bring an end to the death and destruction in Gaza.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tiana Epps-Johnson is the Executive Director of the Center for Tech and Civic Life, an organization which provides technical and financial assistance to election workers nationwide. If this sounds like it should be uncontroversial, hang on to your hats, folks. It is anything but. After her work in 2020 to help election workers conduct the presidential election under horrendously difficult COVID conditions and with inadequate budgets, Epps-Johnson found herself the subject of lawsuits, investigations by state attorneys general, and other forms of harassment. None of these have come to anything, but it's been extremely costly for the organization.She joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic to tell the story. What does the Center for Tech and Civic Life really do? What was the nature of the attacks she faced? How much did it cost her organization to defend them, and how did she pay it? And what does it all mean for the future of safe elections in the United States?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From November 7, 2015: Last week, George Washington University and the CIA co-hosted an event entitled Ethos and Profession of Intelligence. As part of the conference, Kenneth Wainstein moderated a conversation between CIA General Counsel Caroline Krass, Orin Kerr, and Benjamin Wittes on Bridging 20th Century Law and 21st Century Intelligence, a panel which we now present in full. What new legal questions are raised by rapidly evolving technologies and how do those questions interact with existing national security law? In response to these changes, how can the United States strike a balance between privacy, security and the economic imperatives driving innovation? The panel addresses these critical issues and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 19, 2018: The past week saw the culmination of a major shift in U.S. policy as the United States formally opened its embassy in Jerusalem. Yet ongoing protests along the border with the Gaza Strip and the Israeli government’s harsh response have provided a sharp contrast to the hopeful rhetoric surrounding the embassy’s opening ceremony. On Friday, Lawfare senior editor Scott Anderson spoke with Khaled Elgindy, Natan Sachs, and Sarah Yerkes to sort through the headlines. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the past few weeks, there have been several notable developments in lawsuits seeking to disqualify Donald Trump from the 2024 election under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed a case against Trump but invited the petitioners to refile once Trump won the GOP nomination. A court in Michigan rejected a challenge to Trump's eligibility on the grounds that Congress, not the courts, should ultimately decide. And, most recently, a Colorado trial court held that, although Trump did engage in insurrection before and during Jan. 6, Section 3 does not apply to presidents.As these and other cases make their way through the courts, and with the potential that the Supreme Court will at some point weight in, we're bringing you another portion of a conference held last month at the University of Minnesota Law School (for a previous excerpt, see the November 1 edition of the Lawfare Podcast). This panel, focusing on the interplay between the Section 3 challenges and election law, was moderated by University of Minnesota Law School Professor Nick Bednar, and featured Professor Ned Foley of the Ohio State College of Law, Professor Derek Muller of Notre Dame Law School, and Professor Andrea Katz of Washington University School of Law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 22, 2016: This week, Samuel Moyn, Professor of Law and History at Harvard University, closed out a one-day conference on “The Next President's Fight Against Terror” at New America with a talk on “How Warfare Became Both More Humane and Harder to End.” He argues that we’ve moved toward a focus on ending war crimes and similar abuses, rather than a focus on preventing war’s outbreak in the first place. And in his view, the human rights community shares culpability for this problem. It’s an issue that will be of great consequence as the next president takes office amidst U.S. involvement in numerous ongoing military interventions across the globe. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sixty years ago today in Dallas, Texas, Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed President John Kennedy. For almost as long, various (often contradictory) conspiracy theories about that day have been circulating. Gerald Posner used overwhelming evidence and logic to dismantle these theories in his classic book Case Closed, first published in 1993 and re-issued with updates in the three decades since then.David Priess spoke with Gerald about why some anniversaries of major events resonate more than others; the limits of memory; what drove him to first research and write about the Kennedy assassination; what actually happened on November 22, 1963; early conspiracy thinking about it; Jim Garrison's flawed investigation of Clay Shaw; Oliver Stone and his influential film JFK; speculation about the Dealey Plaza "umbrella man" and about Cuban government involvement; decades of US government document releases; new memories from a former Secret Service agent; the impact of grand conspiracy thinking on society; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Case Closed by Gerald PosnerThe book Reclaiming History by Vincent BugliosiThe book Hitler's Children by Gerald PosnerThe book Rush to Judgment by Mark LaneThe book Six Days in Dallas by Josiah ThompsonThe movie JFKThe Lawfare Podcast episode The JFK Assassination Documents, with Gerald Posner and Mark Zaid (December 22, 2021)The book Day of the Jackal by Fredrick ForsythChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The great documentary filmmaker Errol Morris is best known for films such as “The Thin Blue Line” and “The Fog of War.” His latest film, “The Pigeon Tunnel,” is about the great espionage novelist John le Carré, whose real name is David Cornwell. Jack Goldsmith recently sat down with Morris to talk about “The Pigeon Tunnel.” They discussed le Carré’s complex and contradictory attitudes towards the Cold War, the influence of the traitorous British intelligence officer Kim Philby on le Carré's work, what Morris and le Carré have in common as documentarians, and how le Carré compares with Graham Greene and Joseph Conrad. Morris also reflected on his craft, including the difference between an interview and an interrogation and how he learned to interview a subject without saying anything.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At the end of the Cold War, there was no question that the United States was the most powerful country in the world—militarily, economically, and technologically. International relations scholars call this system, where one country is more powerful than all others, a unipolar one. But most analysts now argue that America’s decline over the last two decades coupled with a simultaneous Chinese rise, has ended the United States’s predominance in international politics, and that the world is no longer unipolar.Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, international relations professors at Dartmouth College, made the argument in Foreign Affairs that while it’s true that the United States’s lead at the end of the Cold War has shrunk, the U.S. remains ahead of all other countries in terms of its military, economy, and technological production. Robert Keohane, Professor Emeritus of International Affairs at Princeton, responded to Brooks and Wohlforth’s article, discussing whether polarity matters for the prevention of a conflict between the U.S. and China. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Brooks, Wohlforth, and Keohane for a wide-ranging conversation about what it means for a country to be the strongest of them all, the balance of power between the U.S. and China, what the War in Ukraine reveals about Russia’s global standing, and much more. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past few weeks, the country of Pakistan has pursued an aggressive wave of deportations targeting thousands of Afghan refugees, some of whom have been in Pakistan for generations. Many fear that this move will add to the already precarious and humanitarian situation facing Afghanistan. But the Taliban regime, for one, has reacted in a way few expected.To talk through these refugee removals and their ramifications, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Madiha Afzal, a Fellow in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution. They talked about the origins of the Afghan refugee population in Pakistan, how this latest action intersects with concerns over terrorism, and where the crisis may be headed next.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were jointed by Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to talk over some of the week's big national security news, including:“The Day After.” As the war in Gaza enters a new phase, discussions are increasingly shifting to focus on how Israel will handle a post-Hamas Gaza Strip—and what long-term impact the conflict will have on the West Bank. How is the day after this war coming into focus?“Not Just America’s Mayor…” New York City Mayor Eric Adams is being investigated for accepting donations from a Turkish foundation and other organizations with ties to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, just before lobbying for the early opening of a Turkish consulate in the city. Has Adams done anything wrong? What else could this investigation be looking into?“Election Interference Interference Interference.” A lawsuit over the U.S. government’s engagement with social media is interfering with the FBI’s efforts to interfere with those hoping to interfere in our elections—including the upcoming presidential race in 2024. What threats does this chilling effect present? How should the Biden administration be responding?For object lessons, Quinta recommended “The Vaster Wilds,” Lauren Groff's new adventure story exploring the experience of colonialism. Tyler endorsed Albert Brooks: Defending My Life, the new documentary about the legendary (at least among people over 30) comedian. And Scott told readers to check out “A City on Mars” by Kelly and Zach Weinersmith for a fun (if pessimistic) exploration of all the challenges facing humanity's budding efforts to expand into outer space.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” the last one before Thanksgiving, when we will take a week off. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Legal Fellow Anna Bower. They talked about the latest developments in Mar-a-Lago, where Judge Cannon has issued a cryptic order. They talked about the latest in the Section 3 litigation in three states: Minnesota, Colorado, and Michigan. They talked about the latest weirdness in Fulton County, where there was a confession on the stand of who released some proffer videos to the public. And they took audience questions.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time on YouTube. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 7, 2019: This summer has been a tumultuous one inside the U.S. State Department. In August, the department’s Office of the Inspector General handed down a scathing report alleging political manipulation and abusive practices inside the department’s International Organization bureau—only one of a series of similar allegations. At the same time, a number of career State Department officials ranging from assistant secretaries to the rank-and-file have resigned due to alleged complaints and disagreements with Trump administration officials and policies.To dig into these developments and consider what they might mean for the State Department’s present and future, Scott R. Anderson spoke with reporters Colum Lynch and Robbie Gramer of Foreign Policy magazine, and Lawfare’s Margaret Taylor, who is a fellow alumnus of the State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor and former Democratic Counsel for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States has long set restrictions on the export of certain sensitive goods and technologies, particularly to strategic rivals. But over the past several years, we have seen first the Trump and now the Biden administrations use the legal authorities behind these export controls in new and innovative ways, for purposes ranging from limiting China’s access to key emerging technologies to stymying Russia’s military effectiveness in Ukraine. The only problem is, once you impose these restrictions, you then have to enforce them—and that’s not always an easy task.To learn more about how the Biden administration is taking on this challenge, Lawfare Contributing Editor Brandon Van Grack and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Matthew Axelrod, Assistant Secretary of Export Enforcement at the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security. They discussed how export control enforcement works; the sorts of coordination it requires with industry and foreign countries, friendly and unfriendly; and what new enforcement strategies the United States is pursuing as the use of export controls changes.This is the latest episode of “The Regulators,” a special series Lawfare is co-producing with the law firm Morrison & Foerster, where Brandon is a partner. Each episode, Brandon and Scott sit down with some of the senior U.S. policymakers responsible for crafting and implementing the cutting edge policies that are defining our new era of economic statecraft. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In October 1983, Maurice Bishop, the revolutionary leader and prime minister of Grenada, was executed alongside seven others amid a power struggle in the island nation. Ever since, a mystery has persisted: What happened to their bodies? The whereabouts of Bishop’s remains is unknown, and for the past two years, Washington Post journalists have been trying to find them. Martine Powers hosts the new Post investigative podcast, “The Empty Grave of Comrade Bishop.” She’s been fascinated by Bishop’s story for years, and she takes listeners on a journey through his rise and untimely death. The podcast is part mystery, party history. Bishop was a dynamic, charismatic leader, and an important figure in the history of Black power and politics, his influence felt in Grenada and the United States. The Reagan administration saw Bishop as a socialist threat and worried that the Soviet Union might build a base on Grenada. Days after Bishop was killed, the United States led an invasion of the island. Listeners may also know Martine as the host of “Post Reports,” the news organization's daily podcast. Shane Harris and Martine have spent a lot of time together in the recording studio, but this is the first time he’s asked her the questions. They discussed her new project, how she made her way from print reporting to podcasts, and what she thinks audio journalism gives readers that traditional news reporting often can’t. Among the works mentioned in this episode:“The Empty Grave of Comrade Bishop” episode guide Martine’s bioBishop speaking in New York in 1983President Ronald Reagan speaking about Bishop and Grenada (around 14:20): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfLGDxnRH-Q Excerpts of Reagan’s address following the invasion of GrenadaWashington Post coverage of the invasion: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1983/10/26/the-invasion-of-grenada/cc0f5e1c-9a3b-4d53-bc42-a5708da9f77f/  https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1983/10/26/the-invasion-of-grenada/18d2aa63-f54f-4e76-932b-275fae48c3ea/ White House photos during the invasionChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On November 6, researchers at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy issued a report on “Data Brokers and the Sale of Data on U.S. Military Personnel” that illuminates the national security risks arising from the sale of these data. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with the three of the report’s authors: Justin Sherman, a Senior Fellow at the Sanford School of Public Policy who leads its data brokerage research project; Hayley Barton, a Master of Public Policy and Master of Business Administration student at Duke University and a former research assistant on Duke’s data brokerage research project; and Brady Allen Kruse, a Master of Public Policy student at Duke University and a research assistant on Duke’s data brokerage research project.They talked about the kinds of data that data brokers collect and sell about U.S. military personnel, the national security risks created by these practices, and the gaps in the law that enable this activity. They also discussed policy recommendations for the U.S. federal government to address the risks associated with data brokerage and the sale of data on former and active-duty U.S. military personnel.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The use of deepfakes—a form of artificial intelligence known as deep learning to create manipulated or generated images, video, and audio—is on the rise. In 2022, the U.S. military took a nearly unprecedented step by declaring its interest in deepfake technology for offensive purposes. But the Defense Department’s exploration of this technology poses privacy and ethics risks, especially with respect to human subjects research.To unpack all of this and more, Lawfare Associate Editor Katherine Pompilio sat down with Aimee Nishimura, a Cyber Student Fellow at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at UT Austin. Aimee recently published a piece on Lawfare, entitled “Human Subjects Protection in the Era of Deepfakes.” They discussed the significant dangers posed by deepfakes, how the Defense Department can support the protection of human subjects in its research on the technology, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Three weeks ago, an amazing new book came out about the prosecutions stemming from the Capitol Siege of Jan. 6, 2021. It’s called "Sedition Hunters: How January 6th Broke the Justice System."Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff sat down with the book’s author, Ryan J. Reilly, who is also the Justice Reporter at NBC News. They discussed who the Sedition Hunters are, how Ryan stumbled across them, and why they’ve played such a crucial role in the Jan. 6 criminal investigation.  Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In August, the U.S. Africa Command, aka AFRICOM, reported that it had killed 13 al-Shabaab fighters in southern Somalia. Though the U.S. government said that it did not kill any civilians this time around, several past airstrikes have claimed innocent lives. In one notable example from March 2018, U.S. drone operators killed a 22-year-old mother, Lul Dahir Mohamed, and her 4-year-old daughter, Mariam, as they hitched a ride in a pickup truck with suspected militants.  In a recently published article for The Intercept, Nick Turse offers an unprecedented account of the March 2018 strike, thanks to his reporting in Mogadishu and a secret Pentagon investigation he obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. As Nick writes, “This is a story about misconnections, flawed intelligence, and fatal blindness. It started with bad cell service and ended with an American missile obliterating civilians the U.S. didn't intend to kill, but didn't care enough to save.”  Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Nick, contributing writer at The Intercept, to discuss his piece, a post mortem of that fatal drone strike, and the wider context of AFRICOM's drone war across the region from the Obama administration through the present day. They also discussed why this special operations strike cell “seemed like they did everything wrong,” according to one American drone pilot who worked in Somalia.Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing, including graphic depictions of deadly drone strikes. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott bade a temporary farewell to Alan and spent one last afternoon (for a few months, anyway) digging into the week’s big national security news stories, including:“Ceasefire or Misfire?” We are now one month into Israel’s military campaign in the Gaza Strip. As civilian casualties continue to mount and Israel’s ground operations get underway, there are growing calls for a ceasefire—calls that the Biden administration may now be taking up, in more limited and temporary fashion. Where are we in this conflict? Is there any end in sight?“Freedom of Screech.” Former President Trump’s speech—and the right to it—is increasingly becoming an issue in his various criminal and civil trials, both legal and otherwise (as evidenced by a recent bout of angry shouting he pursued on the stand in his New York civil case). How have courts been balancing the equities? Is there something they can do better?“No, no—THAT’s what the Insurrection Act is for.” In an effort spearheaded by co-conspirator number four himself Jeffrey Clark, President Trump and his allies are reportedly planning for a revenge campaign if he returns to the White House, beginning with a complete takeover of the Justice Department. How realistic are these plans? What can be done to stop them?For object lessons, Alan recommended Sandra Newman’s “Julia,” a retelling of the classic “1984” from a new perspective. Quinta gave a similar bump to Brandon Taylor’s new novel, “The Late Americans.” And Scott rolled logs for his latest piece for Lawfare, a retrospective on the legacy of the War Powers Resolution fifty years after its enactment.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another edition of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on Nov. 9 before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. To talk through this week of Trump’s trials, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with special guest Adam Klasfeld of The Messenger, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein. They talked about the Trump testimony, Ivanka’s testimony, and her brother’s testimony. They talked about gag orders in New York, gag orders in Washington, and what it takes to be subject to a gag order. They talked about Section 3 litigation under the 14th Amendment. And they talked about the Georgia Bureau of Investigation report on all that went down in Coffee County.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 2, 2019: It's hard to open a newspaper or turn on the television without hearing about the dysfunction and partisan polarization affecting members of Congress. But what about their staffs, and what does that mean for national security?This week, Margaret Taylor sat down with seemingly unlikely partners: Luke Murry, National Security Advisor to Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and Daniel Silverberg, National Security Advisor to Democratic House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. They spoke about security issues facing this Congress, what staffers do on a day-to-day basis, and how the two of them actually work together.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From November 8, 2014: Last month, Jack gave a talk at the Hoover Institution on President Obama's war powers legacy. It's a remarkable address: hard-hitting, clear, and sure to discomfort Obama's defenders on war powers issues. In essence, Jack argues that Obama has gone way beyond President Bush in the aggressiveness of his approach vis a vis Congress to initiating overseas conflict. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When she's not hosting The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, Rachel Maddow has been diving deep into the history of fascism in America. First on her podcast, Rachel Maddow Presents: Ultra, and most recently in her new book, Prequel: An American Fight Against Fascism, she has unearthed the stories for popular audiences both of an earlier era of foreign authoritarian influence in American politics and of those who fought against it. In this conversation, Maddow sat down with Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes to discuss Prequel and its relationship to the modern fight against populist authoritarianism. They talked about the many striking similarities between then and now, some key differences, the necessity but ultimate inadequacy of law enforcement as a solution to authoritarian movements, the role of journalism, whether grifting is an inherent feature of right-wing authoritarianism, and why so many heroes of that era's fight against fascism are almost forgotten today.For future reading on this subject, Maddow recommends:Charles R. Gallagher, "Nazis of Copley Square: The Forgotten Story of the Christian Front"Steven J. Ross, "Hitler in Los Angeles: How Jews Foiled Nazi Plots Against Hollywood and America"You can also watch Rachel's full conversation with Ben at https://youtu.be/Y1Yc4Ss8_OI.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Fionnuala Ní Aoláin completed a productive six-year tenure as the UN Special Rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights last week. Among other issues, she examined how financing counterterrorism and new technologies used for counterterrorism affect human rights. She also analyzed the protection of human rights in several locations with different political contexts, including visits to Guantanamo Bay and detention facilities in northeast Syria. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Fionnuala to discuss her experience as special rapporteur. They spoke about the downstream harms of counterterrorism financing, her conversations with Guantanamo Bay detainees, why gender should be a meaningful consideration of counterterrorism policy, and much more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You probably already know that Rep. Mike Johnson is the new Speaker of the House. What you may not know is that every single one of the issues on his plate is a national security issue, at least in the short term. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor and Brookings Senior Fellow Molly Reynolds to talk it all through. They talked about Israel aid, Ukraine aid, Taiwan assistance, the border, FISA Section 702, government shutdowns, and more. It's a rollicking conversation through a crazy bunch of issues that are all on the front burner of the new Speaker's stove as he takes over a job for which he appears to be wholly unprepared. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the debate about data privacy and harms, one issue has not received adequate attention by the press or in policy conversations relative to the severity and volume of harm: the link between publicly available information and stalking and gendered violence. To discuss how “people search” data brokers use public information and contribute to stalking and abuse, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, Eugenia Lostri, sat down with Justin Sherman who recently wrote a Lawfare article on the topic. Justin is the Founder and CEO of Global Cyber Strategies and a Senior Fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy. They talked about the publicly available information carve-outs, the systemic nature of the problem, and how policymakers should step in.Content Warning: This episode contains discussions of gendered violence and stalking. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Lawfare Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri to tackle some of the overlooked national security stories that have been percolating the past few weeks, including:“BrokenAI?” The Biden administration has rolled out a groundbreaking new Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence that seeks to take the first steps towards a real regulatory regime for this revolutionary technology. Is this a responsible step? Or does it threaten to put the U.S. development of AI in a regulatory cage?“Ending the Fracas in Caracas.” The Biden administration is taking a step towards thawing relations with the Maduro regime in Venezuela, easing sanctions at least temporarily in exchange for the release of political prisoners and a promise to hold competitive elections—though Maduro has yet to agree to ensure that most prominent opposition figures will be allowed to participate. Is this a smart way forward or folly?“Let’s Get Mikey to Do It, He’ll Try Anything.” We have a new Speaker of the House in the form of Rep. Mike Johnson. And he has decided to open his speakership with a bold move: separating aid from Israel out from other emergency measures and insisting that it be funded by cuts from the Internal Revenue Service—a move that President Biden has promised to veto and that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has come out publicly against. What does this tell us about the direction Congress is headed in the weeks to come?For object lessons, Alan shared a bit of comedy in the form of Jeff Maurer’s satire of statements on the Gaza conflict, “Windex Ain’t Scared.” Quinta recommended the second season of “Our Flag Means Death” for a delightful romcom about bloodthirsty pirates. Scott celebrated the power of love. And Eugenia recommended the video game Pillars of Eternity for those desperate to play Baldur’s Gate III but whose computers cannot handle it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded live on Zoom before an audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and Josh Gerstein of Politico to talk about Wednesday’s hearing in the Mar-a-Lago case, Section 3 disqualification litigation in Minnesota and Colorado, the latest from Fulton County, what Judge Cannon is up to with her CIPA rulings, and the schedule for the Mar-a-Lago trial.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 26, 2018: With the media and political commentators focused on family separation at the U.S.-Mexico border, few are paying attention to how developments along Mexico's southern border affect the United States. On Monday, Benjamin Wittes spoke with Stephanie Leutert, director of the Mexico Security Initiative at The University of Texas at Austin, who has spent the past several weeks in the field studying the flow of migrants from Central America into Mexico. They discussed who's entering Mexico, why they're doing it, why most continue on to the United States, and where the dangers lie along their journeys.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since Hamas’s attack on Israel on Oct. 7, the Israel-Hamas war has largely been fought in Gaza, a small strip of land along the border of the Mediterranean Sea. But farther inland, there has been an uptick in hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians in the Palestinian territory of the West Bank. Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem says that at least 13 Palestinian herding communities in the West Bank have been forcibly displaced since the beginning of the war due to Israeli settler violence and intimidation, and nearly 100 Palestinians in the territory are reported to have been killed since the war began by both Israeli military strikes as well as settler violence. The fraught relationship between the Israeli government, Israeli settlers, Palestinians, and the Palestinian Authority are not new. But in part because of those existing issues, the West Bank has the potential to expand and complicate the bounds of the Israel-Hamas war—and some may argue that that is already underway. To understand how the West Bank fits into the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Hamas, Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han spoke to Dan Byman from the Center for Strategic & International Studies, who is also Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Editor; Ghaith al-Omari of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; and Scott R. Anderson, Lawfare Senior Editor and Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. They talked about the international law that currently governs the rules of engagement in the West Bank, the political responses of the Israeli government and other Arab states, and how West Bank dynamics will impact the broader outcomes of the Israel-Hamas war. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The British Empire was already buckling under its own internal tensions in the 1920s. One hundred years later, historian and author Matthew Parker uses stories from across the globe to fill his new book One Fine Day, centered on the territorial peak of the empire on September 29, 1923. It reveals much about the limits of empire, the effects of liberation movements on colonized peoples around the world, and the dynamics of strategic transition.David Priess and Matthew chatted about his globally mobile upbringing; the experiences driving him to this topic; the state of the British Empire on and around September 29, 2023; the story of Ocean Island (Banaba); how the First World War affected how colonized people viewed imperial rule; the emergence of social anthropology and its impact on racist views underlying colonialism; the influence of sport in the empire; George Orwell's experience in Burma; the activities of Marcus Garvey; Ian Fleming's time in Jamaica at the house he called Goldeneye, where he wrote all of the James Bond novels; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book One Fine Day by Matthew ParkerThe book Goldeneye by Matthew ParkerThe book Panama Fever by Matthew ParkerThe book The Sugar Barons by Matthew ParkerThe book The Earth Transformed by Peter FrankopanThe book The Silk Roads by Peter FrankopanThe book A Passage North by Anuk ArudpragasamChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A few weeks ago, an organization that works in the democracy protection space asked Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to give a talk about what would happen if Donald Trump both got convicted and got elected. And for this episode of the Lawfare Podcast, we’ve reprised that conversation, with an accompanying YouTube version including their PowerPoint presentation.Ben and Scott talked about what could happen if a president gets convicted and then gets elected, including how the system might respond if it’s a federal case, if it’s a state case, if the case is pending, and if the case is already wrapped up. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the wake of Donald Trump's role in the attempt to overturn the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, lawsuits in states around the country are seeking to disqualify him from the 2024 election. Challengers to his eligibility invoke Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides in relevant part that "No person shall . . . hold any office . . . under the United States . . . who, having previously taken an oath . . . as an officer of the United States . . . to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."As of now, there are nearly two dozen states in which litigation is ongoing to bar Trump from the ballot, and that number is only expected to grow. Earlier this week, a Colorado district began a week-long bench trial and, this Thursday, the Minnesota Supreme Court will hear oral argument. And if a state does disqualify Trump, the United States Supreme Court will no doubt immediately hear the case.On Monday October 30, the University of Minnesota Law School held a conference with leading law and political science scholars on "Section 3, Insurrection, and the 2024 Election: Does the Fourteenth Amendment Bar Donald Trump from the Presidency?" Today's Lawfare Podcast is a recording of one of the conference panels, which focused on the political implications of the Section 3 cases.The moderator was Larry Jacobs of the Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, and the panelists were Julia Azari, a Professor of Political Science at Marquette University; Ilya Somin, a Professor of Law at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School; and Eric Segall, a Professor of Law at the Georgia State College of Law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s been a rough few months for Senator Bob Menendez. The powerful New Jersey Democrat has pleaded not guilty to federal charges related to an alleged bribery scheme under which, according to prosecutors, Menendez carried out favors for the government of Egypt. But while the allegations set out in the indictment sound pretty unsavory, recent decisions by the Supreme Court—in particular, the 2016 case McDonnell v. United States—make prosecuting such corruption cases significantly more difficult. Lawfare recently published an article about the potential impact of McDonnell on the Menendez case by Daniel Richman, the Paul J. Kellner Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Dan to discuss McDonnell, the charges against Menendez, and, of course, the photographs of gold bars allegedly given to Menendez that federal prosecutors included in the indictment.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We are a little more than a year out from the 2024 election—an election that, in countless ways, promises to be unlike any other. One way it may be different is the very real prospect of a scenario in which neither major party candidate secures enough electoral votes to win, kicking the decision to the House of Representatives in what is called a “contingent election.” Possible third parties are actively discussing the possibility of a contingent election as part of their political strategy—and this talk has many experts and advocates nervous about what chaos the turn to a contingent election might wreak. To talk through what this scenario might mean, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Beau Tremitiere and Aisha Woodward of Protect Democracy, which recently released a report—and published a related piece in Lawfare—on the topic. They walked through how a contingent election would work, how it might end up subverting the democratic process, and what alternatives might be out there for those less than content with the two-party status quo.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott came together in the virtual studio to talk over the week’s big national security news, including:“Stuck in the Middle (East) with You.” The Biden administration is finding itself increasingly pilloried from both sides for its handling of the Oct. 7 massacre perpetrated by Hamas and Israel’s ensuing military response in the Gaza Strip, as the right urges stronger support for Israel while some on the left are becoming more vocal in calling for a ceasefire. How far can the Biden administration walk this tightrope?“Et Tu, Jenna?” Four co-defendants of former President Trump, including Rudy Giuliani’s right hand woman Jenna Ellis, have now pled out and promised to cooperate in the Fulton County prosecution addressing alleged election interference—and media reports indicate that his former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has accepted an immunity deal to testify before a federal grand jury. What does this all mean for Trump’s legal prospects moving forward?“Exit, Stage Far Right.” Former President Trump is reportedly once again planning to exit or diminish NATO if he returns to the White House—a position his contender for Republican nominee Vivek Ramaswamy has endorsed. What is the future of U.S. participation in the NATO alliance?For object lessons, Alan recommended Tiffany Li’s brilliant contribution to McSweeney’s Internet Tendency, “Statement from the University on Current Tensions in the Place You’re Probably Thinking About When You Read This,” which satirizes…exactly what you’re thinking about. Quinta lightened the mood by talking about serial killers in recommending Robert Kolker’s new piece, “The Botched Hunt for the Gilgo Beach Killer,” in the New York Times Magazine. And Scott directed D.C. locals to his favorite amaro distillery, Don Ciccio & Figli, who is brewing up botanicals right here in the city’s own Ivy City neighborhood.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” recorded live before an audience of Lawfare Material Supporters on Thursday. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Roger Parloff and Quinta Jurecic, and Lawfare Fulton County Correspondent and Legal Fellow Anna Bower to talk about all the pleas that have happened in Fulton County and all the pleas that are coming. They talked about whether you can take back a plea by announcing that it was extorted, about the blizzard of motions to dismiss that Donald Trump has filed in the D.C. District Court, and about the government's response to the claims of presidential immunity.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 3, 2018: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan won the Turkish election the other day, and becomes the first president under Turkey's new empowered presidential system. His party, in coalition with ultra-nationalists, will control the Parliament as well, so it's a big win for the Turkish president. It may be a loss for democratic values. On Tuesday, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Amanda Sloat, Robert Bosch Senior Fellow at Brookings, to discuss the election results, the crackdown in Turkey and the justifications for it, friction points in U.S.-Turkish relations, and what comes next for Turkey, the United States, and the EU.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s probably fair to say that the Israeli government was not the only one caught flat-footed by the deadly attack launched by Hamas on Oct. 7. On that day, several of the U.S. government’s top diplomatic posts in the Middle East were vacant, and the Biden administration had long focused most of its attention elsewhere in the world. And, in a now infamous episode from only a week prior to the attack, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan had said, “The Middle East region is quieter today than it has been in two decades.”But all that has changed. Though its record is still up for debate, the U.S. diplomatic response has kicked into gear, with several visits to the region from Sullivan, Secretary of State Blinken, President Biden, and other high-level U.S. officials. To take stock of the U.S. diplomatic response to the war thus far, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Akbar Shahid Ahmed, HuffPost's senior foreign affairs reporter, and Robbie Gramer, a diplomacy and national security reporter at Foreign Policy. They talked about the nearly broken Senate confirmation process, the fallout from a high-level diplomatic resignation, and the potential “mutiny brewing” inside the State Department. They also discussed whether or not a reported dissent cable circulating through the department might shift U.S. policy toward Israel-Palestine.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Many will recognize the voice of Steve Inskeep from his nearly two decades-long role hosting NPR's Morning Edition. But he's also the author of what is now a trilogy of books about political relationships in the United States during the 19th century, including his newly published Differ We Must: How Lincoln Succeeded in a Divided America. His newest book uses a unique framework to study Lincoln's leadership and growth: Describing in detail difficult interactions Lincoln had with sixteen individuals, ranging from generals to political opponents to his wife Mary Todd Lincoln.David Priess spoke with Steve about what drew him to Lincoln as a subject; the challenges of recreating private exchanges from long ago; the links between Differ We Must and his earlier books; Lincoln's difficult conversations with Joshua Giddings, Frederick Douglass, Jessie Benton Frémont, Lean Bear, and others; and enduring lessons of Lincoln's pragmatic leadership.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Differ We Must by Steve InskeepThe book Instant City by Steve InskeepThe book Jacksonland by Steve InskeepThe book Imperfect Union by Steve InskeepThe book series Abraham Lincoln: A History by John Nicolay and John HayThe book series Abraham Lincoln by Carl SandburgChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals last week faintly endorsed the Justice Department’s reading of a critical felony charge, “corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding,” which the department has relied on to prosecute at least 317 individuals for their alleged roles in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. In the case, United States v. Thomas Robertson, the court affirmed the Justice Department’s conception of the definition of “corruptly,” as stated in the charge. Robertson followed another D.C. Circuit ruling in April, United States v. Fischer, which upheld the charge even more fragilely.Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff detailed the court’s Robertson decision on Lawfare. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Parloff to discuss Robertson, Fischer, and what it would mean for the Justice Department if its interpretation of the corrupt obstruction statute is ultimately rejected. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Another morning, another surprise plea deal in Fulton County Superior Court. It was Jenna Ellis this time, in front of Judge Scott McAfee, pleading out of the Fulton County election interference case. There was a tearful colloquy and a letter of apology to the people of Georgia. There is a cooperation agreement of some kind, and there is yet another sentence of probation. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down to talk about it all with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower. They talked about how big a deal Jenna Ellis could be for Fani Willis, about how the DA's record is stacking up, about who might be next, and about who's going to hold out and force this whole thing to trial.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thanks to advances in digital technologies, it is now easier than ever for civilians to get involved in military cyber operations. From private civilian companies being involved in cyber defense to individuals engaging in offensive cyber operations against enemy targets, the increased participation of civilians in armed conflict is a risky trend.Lawfare Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with two guests who recently authored an article outlining eight rules to guide the behavior of civilian hackers during war. Tilman Rodenhäuser is a legal advisor at the International Committee of the Red Cross, or ICRC. Mauro Vignati is a senior adviser on new digital technologies of warfare, also at the ICRC. They talked about what could happen if the principle of distinction is eroded and civilians lose their status, what limits governments should impose on civilian hackers conducting cyber operations in the context of an armed conflict, and the response so far from hacker groups and the cybersecurity community.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The promise and risks posed by artificial intelligence appear to have captured our collective imagination. The risks seem to span from global doom brought about by a rogue AI to the enshrinement of harmful bias and discrimination in systems that can determine whether you get a loan. The stakes require governments to step up and regulate the field, with several key companies advocating for government action. This call has been answered, but conceptions of responsible AI risk management and appropriate regulations are already diverging across jurisdictions.To discuss the approaches to AI regulation in the United States and in the European Union, Lawfare Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Arianna Evers, special counsel at WilmerHale, and Itsiq Benizri, counsel also at WilmerHale. Evers and Benizri recently authored an article on comparative approaches to AI regulation for Lawfare. They talked about the breadth of regulatory options being discussed, the similarities and differences across jurisdictions, and how the quickly evolving field affects how they help their clients navigate AI-related challenges.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by their Lawfare colleague and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Senior Fellow Eric Ciaramella to discuss the week’s big national security news, including:“PiS Off.” Elections in Poland appear set to oust the incumbent Law and Justice (or “PiS”) party, which has spent the past several years in power undermining many of the tenants of liberal democracy—that is, if the coalition of centrist and leftist groups that won a parliamentary majority can successfully form a government. What might this tell us about the authoritarian drift in Europe—and the extent to which it’s reversible?“Gaza Under Siege.” Israel’s military response to the massacre committed by Hamas is entering its second week, as rockets continue to rain down on Gaza, which remains cut off to most utilities, supplies, and humanitarian aid. President Biden, meanwhile, is in Israel showing his support, but has had to cancel meetings with Jordanian officials due to outrage over what Gaza authorities initially claimed—inaccurately, according to Israeli officials and the Biden administration—was an Israeli attack on a hospital there that killed more than 500 people. What is the trajectory of this conflict? Where is it headed?“Heir Jordan?” Conservative House judiciary committee chairman Jim Jordan is the latest possible inheritor of the Speakership in the House of Representatives, having won the nomination of the Republican caucus shortly after majority leader Steve Scalise went down in defeat on the floor. But Jordan also failed to win enough support for his colleagues in the first two votes on the floor. What does the state of the House mean for the country?For object lessons, Alan passed along his latest tonally off comfort watch: the British series A Spy Among Friends, which tells the story of notorious spy Kim Philby. Quinta recommended the new book, “Number Go Up,” by Zeke Faux. Scott urged folks to check out the surprisingly huggy and wholesome season 2 of The Bear. And secret musician Eric endorsed the Strong Songs podcast and its close look at the song writing process.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” our weekly YouTube livestream conducted on Zoom for Lawfare Material Supporters. It was a breaking news day on Thursday: Sidney Powell, the Kraken lawyer, pled guilty in a plea deal in Fulton County Superior Court, one day before she and Ken Chesebro were going to trial.To unpack it all, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Roger Parloff and Quinta Jurecic, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han. They talked about the plea, about what it means for Ken Chesebro and the trial for which jury selection was set to start on Friday, about what happened this week in Tanya Chutkan's courtroom where a gag order was imposed on Donald Trump, and about the defense motion to dismiss on presidential immunity grounds in that courtroom and an article about it by Quinta Jurecic.On Oct. 20. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott Anderson sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent for a special edition of "Trump's Trials and Tribulations" to talk about Kenneth Chesebro's surprise guilty plea. This discussion is added to the end of the Thursday conversationThis is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 7, 2018: It's been a bad week for Polish democracy, with the government removing a bunch of judges from the country's Supreme Court in order to replace them with party loyalists. In response, protestors took to the streets to push back against the deconsolidation of Polish democracy. Radek Sikorski joined Benjamin Wittes to discuss the week's events and the larger degradation of Polish governance of which they are a part. Radek served as foreign minister and defense minister of Poland, as well as speaker of the Polish parliament. He has also been a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and he's currently a senior fellow at the Center of European Studies at Harvard University and distinguished statesman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the course of the last two presidential elections, efforts by social media platforms and independent researchers to prevent falsehoods from spreading about election integrity have become increasingly central to civic health. But the warning signs are flashing as we head into 2024. And platforms are arguably in a worse position to counter falsehoods today than they were in 2020. How could this be? On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Dean Jackson, who previously sat down with the Lawfare Podcast to discuss his work as a staffer on the Jan. 6 committee. He worked with the Center on Democracy and Technology to put out a new report on the challenges facing efforts to prevent the spread of election disinformation. They talked through the political, legal, and economic pressures that are making this work increasingly difficult—and what it means for 2024.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Journalist Liza Mundy’s new history of the world’s most storied spy service focuses on the women of the CIA, who for decades worked in jobs that men found less glamorous or career enhancing, and that proved vital to the interests of U.S. national security. The Sisterhood covers practically the entire history of the agency, from its pre-World War II days as the Office of Strategic Services, through the Cold War and the 9/11 attacks, followed by the successful hunt for Osama bin Laden. Shane Harris spoke with Mundy about why she decided to write about the women of the CIA and what that story reveals about the hidden history of the agency. Mundy’s previous book, Code Girls, was about American women who worked as code breakers during WWII.  Among the works mentioned in this episode:The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA   https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/653184/the-sisterhood-by-liza-mundy/ Code Girls: The Untold Story of the American Women Code Breakers of World War II: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/liza-mundy/code-girls/9780316352550/?lens=hachette-books Mundy’s website: http://www.lizamundy.com/ Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In July 2021, the Chinese government published its “Regulations on the Management of Network Product Security Vulnerabilities.” These rules require researchers to inform the government of all flaws in code within 48 hours of their discovery, effectively supporting efforts to stockpile software vulnerabilities, which can then be used for offensive cyber operations.Lawfare Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with two guests who recently authored a report on how China manages software vulnerabilities. Dakota Cary is a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub and a consultant at Krebs Stamos Group. Kristin del Rosso is a public sector field CTO at IT security company Sophos. They talked about how companies have adjusted to China’s rules, how their system compares to the U.S. voluntary approach, and the incentives to collect vulnerabilities for offensive operations. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

“Stories of armies, governments, agencies, and institutions have a way of obscuring the humans behind them,” writes Stuart Reid, an executive editor of Foreign Affairs in his new book, “The Lumumba Plot.” Indeed, his protagonist, Patrice Lumumba, lays claim to one of history’s most contested legacies. In January 1961, just months after taking office as the first prime minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Lumumba was killed in an assassination plot that remained shrouded in mystery for years. As his daughter Juliana once said, “He passed by like a meteor.” Amid this mystery and contestation, Stuart sets himself to the task of finding the real Lumumba. As Stuart writes, “This book seeks to exhume Lumumba, to scrape away the mounds of lies, mythology, and conspiracy that have accumulated around him over the decades.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Stuart to discuss his new book. They talked about the charismatic Congolese leader of course and the other colorful and consequential characters that fill Stuart’s pages, the CIA’s complicity in Lumumba’s assassination, and the neocolonial and Cold War attitudes that led U.S. leaders to view such a tragic foreign policy misstep as an unimpeachable success. They also discussed what lessons “The Lumumba Plot” has for policymakers today. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On September 28, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, or PCLOB, issued its long-awaited report on FISA Sec. 702, a surveillance authority that is set to expire on December 31 if it is not reauthorized by Congress. The report was supported by only three members of the Board, with the two minority members issuing their own separate statement. The three-two split was along party lines. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with four members of the PCLOB, the Chair, Sharon Bradford Franklin, and board members Travis LeBlanc, Beth Williams, and Richard DiZinno. Board member Ed Felten could not join due to medical reasons. In this second of two episodes, they talk about the members’ views on the privacy and civil liberties risks posed by Section 702 and each side’s differing recommendations on how to address these issues, with a special focus on the recommendation that is the most serious point of contention among the two sides. If you haven’t listened to yesterday’s episode, where they talked about the areas on which the members substantially agree and the compliance problems that have plagued the FBI, you may want to do that first. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On September 28, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, or PCLOB, issued its long-awaited report on FISA Sec. 702, a surveillance authority that is set to expire on December 31 if it is not reauthorized by Congress. The report was supported by only three members of the Board, with the two minority members issuing their own separate statement. The three-two split was along party lines. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with four members of PCLOB, the Chair, Sharon Bradford Franklin, and board members Travis LeBlanc, Beth Williams, and Richard DiZinno. Board member Ed Felten could not join due to medical reasons. In this first of two episodes, they talk about areas on which the members substantially agree, the compliance problems that have plagued the FBI, and each side’s different recommendations for how to address those compliance problems. In tomorrow’s podcast, they talk about the members’ views on the privacy and civil liberties risks posed by Section 702, and each side’s differing recommendations for how to address these issues, with a special focus on the recommendation that is the most serious point of contention among the two sides.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes for a serious conversation about Hamas’s attacks in Israel, Israel’s military response, and what it might mean for the rest of the world. Given the gravity of this topic, we chose to forego our usual format and commit the entire episode to this extended conversation. We will be back to our usual format next week. In the meantime, we hope you find our struggle to make sense of these tragic recent events useful as you try to do the same.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” our YouTube livestream conducted on Zoom for Lawfare Material Supporters. This week, we heard from Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff straight out of the Garcia hearings before Judge Aileen Cannon in the Mar-a-Lago case. We heard from Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, who was straight off of two days of hearings in the Fulton County case. And Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic gave us an update from Judge Tanya Chutkan's courtroom on all the motions that have been filed since our last update. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 8, 2012: Peter Berkowitz of the Hoover Institution has a new book out, entitled Israel and the Struggle Over the International Laws of War. The book, which is very brief—more of a long essay, really—is an impassioned critique of the abuse of the laws of war by Israel's critics in both international organizations and in the academy. Peter runs the Hoover Institution's Koret-Taube Task Force on National Security and Law, of which Ben and several other people associated with this blog are members. He's also—full disclosure—one Ben’s closest personal friends. He took a break from his almost unspeakable travel schedule yesterday to stop by Brookings and chat about his book.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The past two weeks have been a historical one for the House of Representatives. Last week, a band of dissident Republicans voted with House Democrats to remove Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy, leaving the office vacant. In his stead, a never-before House rule turned to a secret list of temporary successors that identified Congressman Patrick McHenry as the new Speaker Pro Tempore. But what exactly he is able to do in this role—and what it means for Congress’s ability to pass much needed legislation—is far from clear.To discuss this new predicament, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Brookings Institution Senior Fellow and Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Reynolds. They talked about the history of the rule behind McHenry’s appointment, what authority its authors intended for it to provide, and what it means for Israel, Ukraine, and the pending government shutdown.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Conventional wisdom has long held that countries, and even businesses, should not be run by those suffering from mental illness, especially during times of war or other dramatic challenges. Dr. Nassir Ghaemi, Director of the Mood Disorder Program at Tufts Medical Center and Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine, disputes this notion. In his book A First-Rate Madness and other writings, he lays out a compelling case that in times of crisis, we are actually better off being led by mentally ill leaders than by mentally normal ones.David Priess and Nassir talked about the challenges (and surprising advantages) of assessing the mental illnesses of historical figures; the lingering impact of Freudian psychoanalysis within the psychiatric community; why the best crisis leaders are either mentally ill or mentally abnormal; the differences between mental illness and extreme personality; the indicators of manic depression; the cases of Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, William Sherman, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Adolf Hitler; enduring stigmas associated with mental illness; Nassir's father's political activism and its influence on his son; the American Psychiatric Association's "Goldwater Rule" against offering a professional psychiatric opinion without a patient examination and proper authorization; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book A First-Rate Madness by Nassir GhaemiMemoirs of Emil KraepelinThe book Bipolar General: My Forever War with Mental Illness by Gregg MartinChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Artificial intelligence has massive upside potential. It could revolutionize education, science, and art, and lead to a more prosperous and equitable world. But it also carries equally massive downside risk—not just for individuals but for society and human civilization itself. How do we avail ourselves of AI's benefits while minimizing its costs?That's a question that our two guests today have thought a lot about. Tino Cuéllar is a former Stanford law professor and California supreme court justice, and he's currently the President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Hadrien Pouget is an Associate Fellow in the Technology and International Affairs Program at Carnegie.Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare spoke with Tino and Hadrien about what lessons history can and can't teach us when it comes to regulating AI and what an international regulatory framework for this technology might look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This past Saturday, the terrorist group Hamas launched an unprecedented raid from the Gaza Strip into southern Israel that left more than 1000 people—most of them Israeli civilians, many of them women, children, and the elderly—brutally murdered. Dozens more were taken as hostages back into Gaza. A shocked Israel has in turn responded with missile attacks into Gaza that have killed more than 800 Palestinians there, and is planning a broader offensive there. And as people search for more information on what’s transpired, there are concerns that events may yet spiral out into a broader regional war—one that, among other consequences, might derail efforts at normalization in the Israeli-Saudi relationship that have been a major focus of the United States in recent weeks.To discuss these tragic events and their potentially seismic consequences, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with a panel of leading experts: Natan Sachs, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Director of its Center for Middle East Policy; Dan Byman from the Center for Strategic & International Studies as well as Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Editor; Ghaith al-Omari of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; and Lawfare’s Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes. They discussed the ripple effects the attack is having throughout the region, the role that Iran and other actors may have played, and what it may yet mean for the region and the broader world. Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This morning, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes connected with his old friend Noah Efron about the weekend's events in Israel. Noah is a professor at Bar-Ilan University, a prolific essayist and writer, and the host of The Promised Podcast, a podcast on Israeli life, politics, and culture.In an interview punctuated twice by missile attacks, they discussed what happened over the weekend, the magnitude and horror of the Hamas attack, the impact on Israeli society, and the coming Israeli response in Gaza. They talked about the weird interregnum between the violence over the weekend and the violence that's to come and how quiet things are right now, about whether Israeli society is coming together or whether it is coming apart, about the implications of Hamas holding many hostages for the way the war is going to play out, and more.Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For decades, the United States has maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” toward Taiwan and China. But in recent years, this uneasy status quo has begun to falter, as the Biden administration doubles down on its commitment to Taiwan’s autonomy and China increases provocative military maneuvers aimed at signaling its willingness to use force to assert its claim of sovereignty over the island. Despite the devastation that war between the U.S. and China would surely bring, the two seem to be inching ever closer to conflict. At the same time, many policy assessments seem to assume that the president has the domestic legal authority to defend Taiwan in the event of a sudden and unexpected attack by China. But in a recent article for the Virginia Journal of International Law called “Taiwan, War Powers, and Constitutional Crisis,” Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson argues that history paints a much more complicated picture. As Scott writes, “An international crisis over Taiwan could thus … trigger a constitutional crisis at home—one that threatens the legitimacy of the president’s response and risks undermining popular and congressional support for what is certain to be a difficult war to come.” Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Scott to discuss his article. They walked through the various legislation, legal opinions, and communiques through successive presidential administrations that have defined the U.S. position towards Taiwan to the present day. They also discussed how tensions between the executive and legislative branches might play out in the event of an attack on Taiwan, as well as how the government as a whole might avoid them. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From August 12, 2020: President Trump recently issued executive orders aimed at banning TikTok and WeChat from operating in the United States. To discuss the sanction, Bobby Chesney sat down with Dr. Sheena Chestnut Greitens, an associate professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin and a faculty affiliate with the Strauss Center for International Security and Law and the Clements Center for National Security at UT; and Dr. Ronald Deibert, a professor of political science and the founder and director of The Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. In addition to the executive orders concerning TikTok and WeChat, they also discussed the larger U.S.-China relationship and the role of technology competition in that space.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were once again joined by Congress guru Molly Reynolds to discuss the week’s big national security news, including:“Master of the House, Doling out the Harm, Ready with a Handshake and a Face Palm.” Over the weekend, Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy narrowly avoided a government shutdown. But this week it cost him his speakership, as Democrats joined a bloc of far-right Republicans to vote in favor of a motion to vacate the office. What does this say about the state of the House? And what does it mean for the Biden administration’s legislative agenda moving forward?“Serving Life to 20.” As the Supreme Court begins its new term under increased scrutiny for ethical lapses, several members of Congress have once again introduced legislation that would impose 18-year term limits on the Court’s members. But would this proposal fix the problem? And is it constitutional?“A Foreign Confluence Operation.” Washington has been in a tizzy this week with scandalizing reports of an Iranian influence operation that purportedly sought to influence U.S. policy through several prominent scholars of Iranian descent—some of whom now serve in the Biden administration or are close to beleaguered Iran Special Envoy Rob O’Malley, whose security clearance is currently suspended. What should we make of this story? For object lessons, Alan gave a shout-out to the most recent incarnation of Dune and its soon-to-be-forthcoming sequel. Quinta urged listeners to check out the book “Your Face Belongs to Us,” the creepy-yet-true story of the growth of facial recognition technology and the rise of the start-up that sold it worldwide. And Scott recommended his favorite seasonal cookbook as we get into the cold weather months: Anna Thomas’s “Love Soup.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” our weekly live stream on YouTube—and on Zoom for Material Supporters. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett, Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff, and Legal Fellow Anna Bower to talk about all kinds of things on a whirlwind tour around four different courts.The talked about what’s going on in the New York civil case, what’s with all of these gag orders and gag order requests, what’s up in the Mar-a-Lago case in south Florida, who is pleading guilty in Fulton County, and what’s up with this new motion to dismiss in Washington on asserted grounds of presidential immunity.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.36:09.4Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 23, 2017: As the year is coming to a close, Congress has now missed the deadline for reauthorizing FISA Section 702. Molly Reynolds, a Brookings fellow in Governance Studies and expert on Congress, joined Benjamin Wittes and Susan Hennessey for a conversation on the failure to reauthorize and what happens next. They discussed the politics of Section 702, the influence of this year's overall legislative agenda, and what to expect in 2018 for the crucial intelligence apparatus.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The First Amendment protects speech, but what kind? True speech, sure. But what about false or misleading speech? What if it's harmful? After all, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater—or can you?To answer these questions, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare spoke with Jeff Kosseff, who is an Associate Professor of Cybersecurity Law in the United States Naval Academy’s Cyber Science Department and a Contributing Editor at Lawfare. Jeff is releasing his latest book this month, titled "Liar in a Crowded Theater: Freedom of Speech in a World of Misinformation," in which he describes, and defends, the First Amendment's robust protections for false and misleading speech.They spoke about the book, why you sometimes can yell fire in a crowded theater, and how new technology both superchargers misinformation and provides new tools to fight it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Chatter, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Ben Wittes sat down with author and journalist Jonathan Rauch, of the Brookings Institution. In a wide-ranging conversation, they spoke about Jonathan's numerous books, his start in journalism, and his focus on liberalism, Madisonian Pluralism, and religion within democratic institutions.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today, we’re bringing you an episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem. And we’re discussing the hot topic of the moment: artificial intelligence. There are a lot of less-than-informed takes out there about AI and whether it’s going to kill us all—so we’re glad to be able to share an interview that hopefully cuts through some of that noise.Janet Haven is the Executive Director of the nonprofit Data and Society and a member of the National Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee, which provides guidance to the White House on AI issues. Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down alongside Matt Perault, Director of the Center on Technology and Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill, to talk through their questions about AI governance with Janet. They discussed how she evaluates the dangers and promises of artificial intelligence, how to weigh the different concerns posed by possible future existential risk to society posed by AI versus the immediate potential downsides of AI in our everyday lives, and what kind of regulation she’d like to see in this space. If you’re interested in reading further, Janet mentions this paper from Data and Society on “Democratizing AI” in the course of the conversation.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been an eventful few days in Fulton County with a flurry of orders, a flurry of briefings, the former president deciding he wasn't going to seek removal to federal court, waiting for the 11th Circuit to rule on other people's removals, and other removals being denied—there’s just been a lot going on. To catch up, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower. They talked about whether we’ll really see this case going to trial on October 23, about bail bondsman Scott Hall’s plea agreement, about whether other people will take the plea, about why Donald Trump is not seeking removal, and about all the people who want removal who just can't seem to get it. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

If you’ve been following the news out of Congress recently, you’ve probably been focusing on the narrowly averted government shutdown and the indictment of Democratic Senator Bob Menendez—and, perhaps, the House Republicans’ decision to begin an impeachment inquiry against President Biden. But there have also been some notable updates when it comes to the continuing fallout from Jan. 6. Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unsealed an opinion limiting the ability of the special counsel’s office to access phone records from Rep. Scott Perry under the Speech and Debate Clause. Meanwhile, Trump’s onetime advisor Peter Navarro was finally convicted of contempt of Congress for defying the Jan. 6 committee.  Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Molly Reynolds sat down with two of our favorite guests to call when there’s news about Congress and the law: Mike Stern, former Senior Counsel to the House of Representatives, and Eric Columbus, who recently served as Special Litigation Counsel in the House Office of General Counsel. They discussed Perry, Navarro, how exactly one should define an impeachment inquiry, and, of course, the Menendez indictment.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Russia’s war against Ukraine is the most documented conflict in history. In every part of Ukraine from which Russian forces have retreated, Ukrainian officials and civil society groups have found shocking evidence of mass atrocities and war crimes: torture, rape, summary executions, forced disappearances, looting, and the destruction of Ukrainian cultural heritage sites. The Ukrainian government is working around the clock to seek justice for the victims, even as the war rages on.In this special podcast episode, Lawfare Contributing Editor Eric Ciaramella brings you audio from a recent event at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace featuring Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, Andriy Kostin. In his discussion with Carnegie President Tino Cuéllar, Kostin laid out a compelling case for why Ukrainians believe that peace without justice and accountability would be a false peace. Kostin discussed how his office is dealing with the overwhelming caseload and the help it needs from international partners. This event was organized in partnership with the American Society of International Law and the Embassy of Ukraine in Washington.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott reunited to discuss the week’s big national security news, including:“Do as I Menendsez, Not as I Menendo.” New Jersey Senator and, until recently, chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee Bob Menendez was indicted alongside his wife last week, on charges that they accepted money from Egyptian businessmen in exchange for information and favors arising from Menendez’s official duties. How serious are these charges? Where will they lead?“…with a Silver Spoon.” D.C. federal district court judge Tanya Chutkan is weighing a gag order on former President Trump, aimed at restraining him from commenting on the proceedings or attacking various officials involved in them. Trump and his attorneys, meanwhile, see the gag order request as an attack on his First Amendment rights. Who is likely to prevail? And what are the broader stakes?“The Forever Chore.” The House foreign affairs committee is set to hold the latest in a long series of hearings on a topic that has been on Congress’s agenda for more than a decade: reforming the 2001 AUMF that provides the legal basis for most global counterterrorism operations. But despite near-universal agreement on the need for change, progress has been limited. Is there reason to think this time will be different?For object lessons, Alan recommended the Dear Committee Trilogy, which even non-academics will find hilarious. Quinta urged listeners to check out the recent New York court decision concluding that former President Trump and his businesses misrepresented the value of various properties. And Scott log-rolled for his new law review article digging into some of the tricky constitutional issues raised by the prospect of defending Taiwan.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of Lawfare's live Thursday show, “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” a tour around four courts. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower and Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson and Roger Parloff. They talked about what's going on in Fulton County, about that judgment against Donald Trump and the Trump Organization in the civil case in New York, about Tanya Chutkan’s refusal to recuse herself, and about CIPA, CIPA, CIPA—classified materials in Mar-a-Lago. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 9, 2020: President-elect Joe Biden has selected a new defense secretary, retired general Lloyd Austin, former commander of Central Command. The selection has received somewhat mixed reviews, and to discuss why, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Brookings senior fellow Mike O'Hanlon, a defense policy analyst, and Kori Schake, the head of defense and foreign policy at the American Enterprise Institute. They talked about why people are upset about General Austin's nomination, his background, the experience he has and doesn't have, who would have been a better choice and whether it matters that this is the second administration in a row that begins by putting a retired general at the head of the Pentagon.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Cyber Safety Review Board was created by a Biden administration Executive Order entitled, “Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity.” The Board reviews major cyber events and makes concrete recommendations that can drive improvements within the private and public sectors. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Robert Silvers, Under Secretary for Strategy, Policy, and Plans at the Department of Homeland Security and Chair of the Cyber Safety Review Board, to discuss the Board’s mission and work. They talked about the two reports that the Board has issued, one that it’s currently working on, and a legislative proposal from DHS that seeks to codify the Board in the law and ensure that the Board receives the information it needs to continue to advance the overall security and resiliency of our digital ecosystem.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As humanity builds settlements beyond Earth, myriad ethical issues will arise--many in a different way than they do terrestrially. Astrophysicist and space communicator Erika Nesvold has devoted extensive thought and research to how to ethically govern space settlements, most notably on her podcast Making New Worlds and in her book Off-Earth.In a conversation that pairs well with Shane Harris's March 2022 Chatter discussion with astrobiologist Lucianne Walkowicz about ethical space exploration, David Priess spoke with Erika about her grounding in Star Trek and other science fiction, the JustSpace Alliance that she co-founded with Lucianne, that alliance's interactions with space industrialists, Erika's application to be an astronaut, conflicting motivations for humanity to settle space, how we should select space settlers, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, the concept of legal personhood for non-terrestrial bodies, labor law and criminal justice in space settlements, how motivations for settling space influence openness to various forms of government, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The podcast Making New WorldsThe book Off-Earth by Erika NesvoldThe Chatter podcast episode Ethical Space Exploration with Lucianne WalkowiczThe Star Trek universeThe Foundation book series by Isaac AsimovThe Dune book series by Frank HerbertThe YouTube video All TomorrowsThe movie 2012The book 2010 by Arthur C. ClarkeThe book Artemis by Andy WeirThe movie SunshineThe book A Brief History of Equality by Thomas PinkettyThe book series The Wheel of Time by Robert JordanThe book Doomsday Book by Connie WillisChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Next month, Kenneth Chesebro—the alleged architect of the fake electors plot—is set to be tried in Fulton County, Georgia, on racketeering and other charges. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower sat down with Chesebro’s defense attorneys, Scott Grubman, Manny Arora, and Robert Wilson. In a wide-ranging conversation, they discussed why Chesebro demanded a speedy trial, debated the merits of several pending motions, and chatted about the prospect of a settlement in Chesebro’s case.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On September 19, Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security, Kenneth Wainstein, gave a speech at the Brookings Institution on the current threat environment and the role of the Department of Homeland Security's Intelligence and Analysis Office (I&A) in confronting it. Following the speech, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Wainstein sat down for a Q&A, both between them and with the live audience at Falk Auditorium at the Brookings Institution. It's a wide-ranging conversation about the lessons of 9/11, how we seem to have forgotten them in certain respects, current congressional efforts to rein in I&A’s intelligence-gathering activities domestically, and the post-Jan. 6 need for those authorities.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On August 21, the Human Rights Watch released a report detailing systematic abuses of Ethiopian migrants and asylum seekers at the Saudi Arabia-Yemen border. Researchers interviewed dozens of Ethiopian migrants and asylum seekers and found that Saudi border guards had used explosive weapons on them and shot migrants at close range. Lawfare’s Associate Editor of Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Joey Shea, a researcher in the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch who investigates human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. They discussed the Human Rights Watch recent report, how the international community has responded so far, and the human rights record of Prince Mohammed bin Salman since he ascended the throne in 2015. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the past several months, Ukraine has been engaged in a grinding counteroffensive aimed at retaking lost territory from Russian invaders. Last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky joined President Biden for the U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York to make the case for continued support of Ukraine's efforts—a message they then repeated to members of Congress concerning whether to move forward a much-needed aid package.To discuss the state of the Ukraine offensive and where it sits in the broader political context, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with two leading experts: Eric Ciaramella and Dara Massicot, both of whom are senior fellows in the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. They discussed the state of the counteroffensive, how Zelensky's pitches in New York and D.C. went, and where the conflict seems likely to head in this next phase.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare colleagues Eric Ciaramella and Saraphin Dhanani, the latter for her last episode of RatSec before departing Lawfare, to break down the week’s big national security news stories, including:“UNGA UNGA Party.” President Biden and Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelenskyy made back-to-back addresses to the U.N. General Assembly, which is gathered in New York for its annual summit this week. What should we make of their statements? Might this be a turning point for the conflict—and, if so, in which direction?“Et Tu, Modi?” Canada has leveled a serious allegation against the government of India: that it was directly involved in the recent assassination of a Sikh separatist leader (and Canadian citizen) on Canadian soil—something that promises to complicate U.S. efforts to bring India into the fold as a balance to China. How credible are these claims and what might they mean?“Ransomwhere?” The Biden administration has struck a deal with the government of Iran, exchanging several imprisoned Iranian nationals and $6 billion in frozen oil revenue for five U.S. nationals held by Iran and their spouses. Is this negotiating with terrorists, a new opening for Iran negotiations, or something else entirely?For object lessons, Quinta recommended Tyler Austin Harper’s penetrating review of Richard Hanania’s “The Origins of Woke.” Eric also went the critic’s route and passed along Gary Shteyngart’s withering review of Walter Isaacson’s new Elon Musk biography. Scott urged anyone with a junior mycologist at home to run out and find Elise Gravel’s charming “The Mushroom Fan Club.” And Saraphin gave a double-headed finale: BBC’s controversial documentary “India: The Modi Question,” which has been banned in India; and David Brooks’ recent article, “How America Got Mean.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This past Thursday, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson hosted “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” Lawfare’s weekly live video chat about developments in the many ongoing trials circulating around former President Trump. He was joined by Lawfare’s two leading court reporters, Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Legal Fellow Anna Bower, both of whom have been closely following developments in courthouses around the country, both from afar and sometimes up close and personal. They talked about removal proceedings in Georgia, a proposed gag order of the former president in Washington, D.C., and new news about how former President Trump allegedly mishandled classified information in Florida, as well as the coming wave of litigation around the country seeking to disqualify Trump from the presidency under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 25, 2019: Our friends from the National Security Institute at George Mason University stopped by earlier this week to discuss U.S.-China relations. Lester Munson, Jodi Herman, Jamil Jaffer, and Dana Stroul, former Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers who collaborated and sometimes competed with one another on the Committee, had a lively discussion about Huawei, cyber and tech security, the South China sea, and Uighur internment.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It is commonplace for American leaders to describe their fiercest foreign adversaries as irrational, crazy, delusional, or illogical. In their new book, “How States Think: The Rationality of Foreign Policy,” political scientists John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Sebastian Rosato of the University of Notre Dame argue that these claims and many similar ones are often wrong because they're based on a flawed understanding of state rationality in international affairs.Jack Goldsmith questioned Mearsheimer and Rosato about why they think most states act rationally most of the time in developing grand strategy and managing crises. Among other topics, they discussed how their theory of state rationality differs from rational choice theorists and political psychologists, why understanding state rationality is important to success in international affairs, and why Mearsheimer, a harsh critic of U.S. expansion of NATO and of the U.S. choice to pursue liberal hegemony after the Cold War, nonetheless argues in this book that those decisions were rational. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The British royal family and UK intelligence operations have been linked since Queen Victoria's time, involving everything from personal protection to matters of international intrigue to concerns about blackmail. Professor and author Rory Cormac, who has conducted extensive research on the British intelligence services, has recently added to his corpus of writings in the field with a book about the modern royal-intelligence intersection: Crown, Cloak, and Dagger, co-authored with Richard Aldrich.David Priess and Rory discussed the difference in US and UK education about the royal family; intelligence foundations during the reign of the first Elizabeth; why it fell apart under her successor; the seeds of modern intelligence under Victoria; the involvement of UK intelligence officers in the death of Grigori Rasputin; the challenges and advances involving intelligence and Edward VII, George V, and Edward VIII; the contributions of George VI to the Allies' massive D-Day deception operations; Elizabeth II's reading of intelligence reports; Soviet spy Anthony Blunt's close relationship with the royal family; Elizabeth's role as a diplomatic "helper;" the exposures of Charles III and Prince Willliam to intelligence; why Clement Attlee was an underappreciated prime minister; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Crown, Cloak, and Dagger by Richard J. Aldrich and Rory CormacThe book How To Stage a Coup by Rory CormacChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Democratic backsliding, a term that American political scientists usually use to describe the process by which other countries transition to autocracy, has come home. Freedom House’s Global Freedom Index, which attempts to track the health of democracies around the world, recently demoted the United States from a score of 90 in 2015 to 83 in 2021, lower than every established democracy in Western Europe. How did American democracy fall so far behind, and more importantly, what can we do about it? Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien spoke with Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, authors of the new book, “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” to answer these questions about our ailing democracy. They discussed the diagnoses and prescriptions of this breaking point, the most damaging counter-majoritarian features of the U.S. Constitution, and why constitutional and electoral reform is so damn difficult in the U.S.—but not impossible. They also got into how the Republican Party went off the rails.  Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Economic warfare isn’t a new concept. Protectionist policies, asymmetrical trade agreements, currency wars—those are just a few examples of the economic levers states have long used to control outcomes. But in their new book, two political scientists, Henry Farrell and Abe Newman, argue that a technological innovation spurred on by free market embracers and coopted by the U.S. was an accidental entry point into a new era of economic statecraft—an era whose precise contours and rules are still being ironed out today, as we are fighting in a so-called economic war. Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han talked to them about how this weaponization came to be, how U.S. national security objectives are bleeding into economic warfare, and what policymakers might focus on in trying to ensure that the economic web that the U.S. currently sits at the center of is not ravaged by its own power. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, the UN General Assembly will meet in New York to discuss, among other things, international cooperation to improve global cyber security challenges. This meeting builds on national and international commitments and initiatives that have already been made this past year. One such initiative is cyber-secure nations banding together to provide aid to cyber-risk nations.Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Eugenia Lostri, Lawfare's Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, who recently wrote an article titled, “What Will Mechanisms for Cybersecurity Aid Look Like?” They discussed why cybersecurity aid is necessary, the growing initiatives that the U.S., EU, and international bodies are making in this area, and the many challenges that await.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Some time soon, former President Donald Trump is expected to file a motion in U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s courtroom to dismiss the Jan. 6 case against him based on some theory of presidential immunity. In a recent piece for Lawfare, our very own Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani and Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes write, “The bottom line is that this defense is a bit of a moon shot for Trump, but it’s not a crazy moon shot.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Saraphin and Ben to talk through their article, “The Trump Defense, Part II: The Presidential Immunity Gambit.” They discussed the general contours of the defense’s argument and strategy, the prosecution’s likely counterarguments, and all the murkiness and unknowns in between. They also talked about how, even if Judge Chutkan does not accept Trump’s immunity defense—and even if the appellate courts ultimately affirm her judgment on that score—the immunity defense could still be useful to the former president. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, with Scott traveling, Quinta and Alan were joined by Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Reynolds to break down the week’s big national security news stories, including:“What is Impeachment, Really?” Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy has announced an impeachment inquiry against President Biden seemingly with the goal of finding something to impeach him over. Will this do anything to hold back the right flank of McCarthy’s caucus from coming for McCarthy’s speakership? “The Investigation of the Investigation of Donald Trump.” House Judiciary Committee Chairman and fearless Trump defender Rep. Jim Jordan has fired back against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis over the Georgia state indictment of Donald Trump, announcing that he’s planning to investigate Willis for engaging in what he terms a politically motivated prosecution. Willis has responded by accusing Jordan of seeking “to obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding.” What kind of authority, if any, does Congress actually have to conduct this kind of oversight?“Still Musky.” A new biography of Elon Musk by Walter Isaacson has sparked controversy thanks to Isaacson’s description of a decision by Musk to turn off Starlink coverage near Crimea to block a Ukrainian maneuver. Isaacson has already walked back his own reporting … but the incident still raises questions about Musk’s power on the global stage and his ability as a private actor to shape the course of war.For object lessons, Alan recommended the novel “Song of Achilles.” Molly shared a PBS documentary series about the Troubles called Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland, and Quinta shouted out the HBO documentary series Telemarketers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” our weekly video conversation with Lawfare editors and writers on the ongoing Trump trials. On Thursday afternoon, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Lawfare Legal Fellows Saraphin Dhanani and Anna Bower. They talked about what's going on in Mar-a-Lago, what's going on in Fulton County, and what’s going on in Judge Tanya Chutkan’s courthouse in Washington. Will Judge Chutkan recuse herself? They also talked about Section 3 litigation under the 14th Amendment in Colorado, Minnesota, and elsewhere.Please join us next time by becoming a Material Supporter at our website, lawfaremedia.org/support, or subscribing to our YouTube channel.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 16, 2021: The Biden administration has promised significant changes to the U.S. relationship with Iran that could have a marked impact on the Middle East. What is the likelihood that this new administration will be successful? And how will other regional developments—from the Abraham Accords between Israel and a few Arab states, to the healing of the rift within the Gulf Cooperation Council, to the ongoing morass in Syria—affect the dynamics here?To address these questions, David Priess hosted a panel discussion on February 11 for the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He sat down with Norman Roule, a 34-year veteran of the CIA, who served as the national intelligence manager for Iran for more than eight years; Kirsten Fontenrose, formerly the senior director for the Persian Gulf on the National Security Council staff and currently the director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council; and Ambassador Dennis Ross, who has served in U.S. government positions pertaining to the Middle East for some 40 years, and who is now a distinguished fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The question of whether the Fulton County trial of Donald Trump and his co-defendants will be removed to federal court is now before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and it's on its way to the Supreme Court. Judge Steve Jones of the District Court in the Northern District of Georgia denied Mark Meadows’ motion for removal. He has now also denied an emergency stay of that ruling, and so the question goes to the appeals court in the federal system, even as the underlying criminal case percolates along in Fulton County court in Georgia.To discuss it all, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein, and Lee Kovarsky of the University of Texas Law School, who recently wrote a piece on the subject for Lawfare. They talked about the right standard for removal and whether Meadows should be yanked out of Fulton County court, what the Eleventh Circuit and the Supreme Court are likely to do with it, how long they are going to take, and whether the federal litigation will screw up the timing of the Fulton County prosecution.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s been another brutal summer with seemingly constant natural disasters precipitated by climate change. The United States and other countries have rightfully begun thinking of climate change as a security issue. But extreme weather is not the only challenge we must contend with. There’s also the problem of climate change’s victims, many of whom are forced to leave their homes. Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Erin Sikorsky, Director of the Center for Climate & Security at the Council on Strategic Risks, to talk about this phenomenon, which is often referred to as climate migration. They discussed the scope of the climate migration crisis, its security implications, and how we can try to mitigate the harm.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On August 30, soldiers and high-ranking officers of the Armed Forces of Gabon seized control of government buildings and communication channels in the capital city of Libreville, detaining Gabon’s President Ali Bongo in his residence and declaring an end to the Bongo family’s 56-year rule. It was a coup—one of nine in the last three years in West and Central Africa, including in Niger just one month prior.  Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien spoke with Naunihal Singh, author of the book “Seizing Power: The Strategic Logic of Military Coups,” to discuss the spate of coups in the region, the origins of coups, what makes certain countries more coup-prone than others, and the rise and fall of anti-coup norms during and after the Cold War. They also dispelled several coup myths, including the myth of the coup contagion.  Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States, the European Union, and China are involved in intense conflicts to control the digital economy, both within their borders and globally. Anu Bradford, the Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization at Columbia Law School, provides a framework for understanding and assessing these conflicts in her new book, entitled “Digital Empires: The Global Battle to Regulate Technology.” Jack Goldsmith spoke to Bradford about why the EU rights-driven model is in ascendancy in the West and what this means for the U.S. tech companies that are the primary targets of EU regulation—and for innovation more generally. They also spoke about the tech wars between the United States and China, whether U.S. techno-protectionism is a good idea, how far the United States has departed from its 1990s-style Internet freedom agenda, and how well China's state-driven model is faring in authoritarian countries. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How much influence do social media platforms have on American politics and society? It’s a tough question for researchers to answer—not just because it’s so big, but also because platforms rarely if ever provide all the data that would be needed to address the problem. A new batch of papers released in the journals Science and Nature marks the latest attempt to tackle this question, with access to data provided by Facebook’s parent company Meta. The 2020 Facebook & Instagram Research Election Study, a partnership between Meta researchers and outside academics, studied the platforms’ impact on the 2020 election—and uncovered some nuanced findings, suggesting that these impacts might be less than you’d expect.Today on Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic are joined by the project’s co-leaders, Talia Stroud of the University of Texas at Austin and Joshua A. Tucker of NYU. They discussed their findings, what it was like to work with Meta, and whether or not this is a model for independent academic research on platforms going forward.(If you’re interested in more on the project, you can find links to the papers and an overview of the findings here, and an FAQ, provided by Tucker and Stroud, here.) Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott celebrated the second anniversary of Rational Security 2.0 by bringing back everyone's favorite game show edition: the Hot Take Takedown! But this year, instead of being contestants, they sat in judgment on the following hot takes from their Lawfare colleagues:Molly Reynolds, on whether there will be a government shutdown this month;Tyler McBrien, on what should happen with overseas U.S. troop deployments; andBenjamin Wittes, on who will be held accountable first, Russian President Vladimir Putin or former President Donald Trump.Which of these hot takes will be deemed too cold, which too hot, and which just right? Listen in to find out!Meanwhile, for object lessons, Alan shared one of his new favorite uses for superfluous fruits. Quinta shared just the sort of story you expect to hear out of Burning Man: alleged Jan. 6 co-conspirator and criminal defendant Jeffrey Clark casting judgment on former Deputy Solicitor General (and beanie-wearing Burning Man attendee) Neal Katyal. And Scott urged even non-vegetarian listeners to check out the new, updated edition of Peter Singer's classic work on animal rights, "Animal Liberation Now!"Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of our weekly live stream series, “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” which takes place on YouTube each week on Thursday afternoons at 4 p.m. ET. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, to talk about the latest events in Proud Boys sentencing and in Georgia. They talked about the hefty sentences that Enrique Tarrio and other Proud Boys received this week in federal district court in Washington, about how these sentences compare to those received by Oath Keepers and other Jan. 6 perpetrators, and about the machinations in Georgia—removal, immunity, severance, and all the other stuff that is going on with poor Judge McAfee trying to deal with a 19-defendant trial.Please join us next time by becoming a Material Supporter at our website, lawfaremedia.org/support, or subscribing to our YouTube channel.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 19, 2021: In the wake of the January 6 mob attack on the Capitol, some have called for the invocation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Section 3 disqualifies anyone who has engaged in rebellion or insurrection against United States from public office. In particular, critics of President Trump have seized on this as a potential way of preventing him from running in 2024. Alan Rozenshtein spoke about Section 3 with professors Daniel Hemel of the University of Chicago Law School and Gerard Magliocca of the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Liberalism today is under attack, as it often has been. Samuel Moyn, the Chancellor Kent Professor of Law and History at Yale University, believes that liberalism's failures, and a path to its better future, can be discerned through a study of how liberal intellectuals reacted to the rise of fascism and Nazism during the World War II period, and especially to Soviet communism during the Cold War. Jack Goldsmith sat down to talk to Moyn about his new book on the topic, “Liberalism Against Itself: Cold War Intellectuals and the Making of Our Times.” They discussed how and why Cold War liberals such as Isaiah Berlin and Gertrude Himmelfarb transformed liberalism, and why he thinks the transformation has had deleterious effects on U.S. foreign and domestic policy. They also discussed the aims of intellectual history and the relationship between his project and recent anti-liberal projects from the right.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When he was 18 years old, Ted Hall, then a Harvard undergraduate, was recruited to join the Manhattan Project, becoming the youngest physicist on the U.S. team racing to build an atomic bomb before the Nazis. When it became clear that Germany would lose the war, Hall feared that the Americans might maintain a monopoly over nuclear weapons, an imbalance he thought could lead to global tyranny. So he decided to share secret designs with the Soviet Union, which was then an ally of the United States on its own path to build a bomb.That fateful action, and the life-long consequences for Hall and his wife, Joan, are the subject of filmmaker Steve James’ new documentary, “A Compassionate Spy.” Using original interviews with members of Hall’s family, and archival footage of the now deceased physicist, James explores Hall’s motivations for sharing nuclear secrets and the FBI’s attempts to charge him with that crime. It’s a complex story about espionage, idealism, and ultimately the love between Ted and Joan that helped to keep the truth hidden for decades.Shane Harris spoke with James about the film and his career as a documentary filmmaker. James directed several acclaimed films, including “Hoop Dreams,” “Life Itself,” and “Abacus: Small Enough to Jail.”“A Compassionate Spy” trailer: https://participant.com/film/compassionate-spySteve James’ filmography: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0416945/  Also discussed in this interview:“Mission to Moscow,” the surprising pro-Soviet film from “Casablanca” director Michael Curtiz: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0036166/?ref_=nm_flmg_t_39_dr“Bombshell: The Secret Story of America's Unknown Atomic Spy Conspiracy,” by Joseph Albright and Marcia Kunstel https://www.amazon.com/Bombshell-Secret-Americas-Atomic-Conspiracy/dp/081292861XThe Venona program, which helped to finger Hall as a spy for Moscowhttps://www.nsa.gov/Helpful-Links/NSA-FOIA/Declassification-Transparency-Initiatives/Historical-Releases/Venona/https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhattan-project-history/Events/1945-present/venona.htmChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 26, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a final rule with new compliance and disclosure obligations surrounding material cybersecurity incidents. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Kate Hanniford, partner at Alston & Bird, to talk about the requirements and challenges this new rule presents. They talked about some of the problems and concerns that caused the SEC to engage in a rule-making process, when an incident rises to the level of a material cybersecurity incident, and whether the new rule is consistent with the National Cybersecurity Strategy’s goal of harmonizing disclosure and reporting requirements for companies. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As the 2024 presidential election inches closer, legal scholars are hotly debating whether former President Trump’s actions in relation to Jan. 6 might have disqualified him (and many others) from public office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. But far less attention has been given to how precisely this disqualification should be implemented so as to bring the ultimate issue to the Supreme Court for decision—preferably before the 2024 election is under way. To discuss these issues, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson recently sat down with two leading election law experts and friends of the podcast: Professor Ned Foley from The Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law; and Professor Derek Muller of the University of Notre Dame Law School. They discussed how Section 3 might be interpreted, the ways it might be implemented in relation to former President Trump, and what other avenues for enforcement might apply against other people facing a similar possibility of disqualification.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There is no more consequential technological development in recent years than widely accessible artificial intelligence. And there are few more consequential contemporary figures in the artificial intelligence field than Mustafa Suleyman, who is the co-founder of DeepMind Technologies, an early leading artificial intelligence firm later bought by Google, and more recently, co-founder of Inflection AI, a firm devoted to personalizing artificial intelligence.Jack Goldsmith sat down with Suleyman to talk about his new and somewhat frightening book, “The Coming Wave: Technology, Power, and the Twenty-first Century's Greatest Dilemma,” which is his take on the novel threats posed by artificial intelligence and synthetic biology. They focused on the artificial intelligence components of the book, discussing AI's promises—and especially its dangers—to both individuals and the state, and what governments and firms can realistically do to redress the dangers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 12, 2021: Lost in the shuffle of an impeachment trial here in the United States was big news from Canada last week. Canada’s Minister of Public Safety added the Proud Boys to Canada’s terror entity list. The listing might be in Canada, but the group had a role in the January 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol. The listing has all sorts of interesting legal and national security implications, so Jacob Schulz talked it through with two Canadian national security experts. Jessica Davis is a former senior strategic intelligence analyst with the Canadian Security Intelligence Service who is now the president of Insight Threat Intelligence and a PhD student at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University. And Leah West is an assistant professor of International Affairs at Carleton University and serves as counsel with Friedman Mansour LLP. They talked about right-wing extremism in Canada, what the consequences of the listing might be and what it reveals about the relationship between Canada and the United States.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott reunited to talk through the week’s big national security news, including:“Pack Your Knives and Go Home.” Vladimir Putin’s top chef has been eliminated. Wagner mercenary chief and Kremlin caterer Yevgeny Prighozin was killed in a plane crash this past week alongside a number of associates, in what the government has conceded might have been a deliberate act. If this was Putin’s revenge, what led him to take this step now? And what will it mean for his Wagner mercenary group—and the stability of Putin’s regime?“The Down Mexico Way.” At the first Republican presidential primary debate last week, there was surprising unity around one point: using the military to go after drug cartels in Mexico, whether it cooperates or not. What should we make of the villainization of America’s southern neighbor? And how realistic are these sorts of proposals?“(Re)Movin’ On Up.” Mark Meadows spent this past Monday trying to move his prosecution for crimes relating to 2020 election interference from Fulton County, Georgia, to federal court, so he can claim a form of immunity stemming from the Supremacy Clause. And some of his co-defendants are not far behind. What should we make of these arguments? Are they likely to succeed?For object lessons, Alan recommended literary puzzle box and joy to read " Trust" by Hernan Diaz. Quinta shared the HBO show, "How to with John Wilson." And Scott dug into the historical archive to endorse Stanley Karnow's "Vietnam: A History." Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today we’re bringing you a special edition of the Lawfare Podcast: another episode of our series, Trump Trials and Tribulations, recorded live on YouTube before an audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. On Thursday, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic and Lawfare Legal Fellows Saraphin Dhanani and Anna Bower to get an update on everything that's been going on in the Mar-a-Lago case, in the Georgia Fulton County case, and in the Jan. 6 case in Washington. They talked about that marathon hearing in Georgia where Mark Meadows testified, about Judge Chutkan setting a trial date in Washington, about why Judge Cannon in Florida is not doing anything, and about the non-criminal cases—the attorney discipline cases—that a number of lawyers involved in Jan. 6 are facing.Please join us next time by becoming a Material Supporter at our website, lawfaremedia.org/support, or subscribing to our YouTube channel.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 3, 2016: Michel Paradis, a senior attorney in the Department of Defense’s Office of the Chief Defense Counsel and counsel for Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, came on the podcast to talk about the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' recent ruling in the Al-Nashiri case. So did Bob Loeb, a partner at Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe and the former Acting Deputy Director of the Civil Division Appellate Staff at the Department of Justice. Along with Benjamin Wittes, Michel and Bob discuss the ins and outs of the court's ruling from both a legal and a policy perspective.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The National Intelligence Strategy is out, and David Kris, a founder of Culper Partners, sat down to talk about it with Michael Collins, the acting head of the National Intelligence Council. They discussed many aspects of U.S. national security, defense, cyber, and intelligence strategy, including the increasing geopolitical significance of non-state entities, and even the meaning of the word intelligence itself. They also cover Mike's long and illustrious career inside the U.S. intelligence community and his thoughts about the future of U.S. intelligence.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The English language has recently developed a historically unique dominance in the global marketplace--a situation that brings plenty of benefits and just as many downsides. Rosemary Salomone, Kenneth Wang Professor of Law at St. John's University, has researched and analyzed various perspectives on English's supremacy in her recent book The Rise of English, which has a paperback version with a new preface coming early in 2024.David Priess spoke with Rosemary about her background in linguistics and education studies, the origins of the English language's dominance, the role of pop culture in the balance between English as spoken in the United States and as spoken in the United Kingdom, divergent official language policies of international organizations like the United Nations and the European Union, the Anglophone bubble, English as a marketable skill, the debate about the English language within France, French vs Chinese inroads in Africa, the role of the French and English languages in the Rwandan genocide and its aftermath, the controversy over the People's Republic of China-funded Confucius Institutes, the rise of English as the language of protest internationally, the culture around foreign language learning in the US, views about computer coding as a "foreign langauge," Ukrainian President Zelensky's use of the English language, the possibility of Spanish replacing English as the most global language, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book The Rise of English by Rosemary SalomoneThe book True American by Rosemary SalomoneThe book Visions of Schooling by Rosemary SalomoneThe book Madam Speaker by Susan PageChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yesterday marked the two-year anniversary of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Around 80,000 Afghans were relocated during the withdrawal, and many do not have a pathway to permanent citizenship here in the United States. To get a sense of those immigration challenges and the potential for congressional action on those issues, Bryce Klehm sat down with Shala Gafary, the Managing Attorney of Project: Afghan Legal Assistance at Human Rights First, and Jennifer Quigley, the Senior Director of Government Affairs at Human Rights First. They talked about the current legal status of those relocated persons in the United States, the challenges faced by those still in Afghanistan, and the potential passage of the Afghan Adjustment Act, a bill that could help alleviate some of those legal obstacles.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What do we mean when we talk about "cybersecurity"? There's clearly a technical component: can someone prevent, through clever hardware and software, someone else from accessing some device or data? But that just raises the question of who should have access. And that's not a technical question. It's a legal, social, and moral one.This, at least, is the argument made by Josh Goldfoot, Principal Deputy Chief at the Department of Justice's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, the nerve center of the federal government's attempt to prosecute cyber criminals. A litigator and policy lawyer with decades of experience thinking about cybersecurity and digital surveillance, Josh just published a paper for Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract research paper series making his case for why cybersecurity isn't just a technical problem. Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke to Josh about his paper and what viewing cybersecurity as a social, not just engineering, problem means for our ongoing efforts to secure our digital lives.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yesterday, August 28, was a busy day in court. In federal court in Atlanta, Donald Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows made the argument for why the charges against him in Fulton County should instead be tried before a federal judge. And in Washington, D.C., Trump’s attorneys tangled with the special counsel’s office in a hearing in the Jan. 6 case, which resulted in Judge Tanya Chutkan scheduling a trial date for March 4, 2024. Lawfare’s devoted team headed to both courtrooms—so we’re bringing you a double dispatch from both Georgia and D.C. Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Anna Bower, who spent her day in the Georgia courtroom, and Saraphin Dhanani and Hyemin Han, who held down the fort in D.C., to talk through the two hearings.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On August 20, Guatemalans elected a new president, Bernardo Arévalo. His landslide victory was also a major win for the country’s struggling democracy. An unexpectedly strong candidate who ran on an anti-corruption platform, Arévalo triumphed despite months of dirty tricks by institutional actors seeking to preserve the country’s status quo.To discuss Arévalo’s victory, the wild months that led up to it, and the challenges ahead, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic talked to Manuel Meléndez-Sánchez, a PhD candidate in Political Science at Harvard University who studies emerging challenges to contemporary democracy, with a focus on Latin America. Guatemala isn’t out of the woods yet, but in a moment of worldwide anxiety over democratic backsliding, the Guatemalan election might be the rarest of things: a good news story.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to break down the week’s big national security news stories, including:“Home to Roost.” A judge in the military commission trying Abdul Raheem al-Nashiri, a suspect in the 2000 USS Cole bombing, has ruled that his confession is inadmissible on the grounds that it was tainted by his prior torture and interrogation at the hands of U.S. officials, even though the confession itself was extracted from a non-coercive “clean team.” What does this mean for the future of the Nashiri trial? And of the military commissions as a whole? “Disqualification, Qualified.” A pair of leading conservative constitutional scholars has reignited the discussion surrounding Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, arguing that it is self-executing and excludes former President Trump from the presidency. How persuasive are their arguments? And what impact will they actually have on the 2024 election?“A Distinctive Musk.” The New Yorker has run a profile of Elon Musk, focusing in substantial part on the complicated but central role he and his company SpaceX have come to play in Ukrainian military efforts, despite his frequent flirtations with Russian President Vladimir Putin. What should we make of Musk’s important role in national security affairs? And are there better ways for the U.S. government to approach it?For object lessons, Quinta shared a profile of the weirdest Jan. 6 co-conspirator to date. Scott endorsed the new true spy thriller podcast series, “Spy Valley.” And Natalie shouted out her most recent favorite delicious treat, Nightingale ice cream sandwiches.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today we’re bringing you a recording of our live virtual event from this past Thursday. It’s part of our series, Trump Trials and Tribulations, where we provide regular updates on what’s going on in the criminal trials of Donald Trump in DC, Florida, and Georgia. Please join us next time by becoming a Material Supporter at our website, lawfaremedia.org/support, or subscribing to our YouTube channel.This week, Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Scott R. Anderson and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower to talk about mug shots in Georgia, conflicts of interest in Florida, trial dates in DC, and violent threats against a judge.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 15, 2017: This afternoon, the Washington Post broke a major story: Donald Trump disclosed highly classified material to the Russian ambassador and Foreign Minister in the Oval Office last week, compromising a highly sensitive counterterrorism program run by an allied intelligence service. This evening, we got former DNI General Counsel Robert Litt on the line for a discussion with Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes of the latest mess. Litt helped coordinate and manage the intelligence community's response to the Edward Snowden revelations, so he knows a little something about responding to massive intelligence disclosures. They talked about how bad the disclosure may be, what the remedies for it are, and what we still don't know.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this month, there was big trouble in little Marion, Kansas, where an entire police department raided the offices of the Marion County Record, a small, family-owned newspaper about 60 miles north of Wichita, with seven employees and a circulation of about 4,000. To discuss this alarming violation of press freedom, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Caitlin Vogus, Deputy Director of Advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. They talked about what motivated the raid, how it went down, and the chilling effect this kind of thing can have on small town newspapers and big media organizations alike. They also discussed what journalists—from lone freelancers to sizable newsrooms—can do to protect themselves from all manner of press freedom violations. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On April 13, 2022, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes conducted his first “special military operation” at the Russian embassy in Washington, DC. Now, Wittes is conducting these protests abroad on what he calls the ERAS (Eradicating Russian Ambassadorial Sleep) Tour. In his conversation with Katherine Pompilio, one of Lawfare’s associate editors and this week’s Chatter guest host, Wittes talks about his most successful special military operation yet, dealing with international law enforcement, NATO’s impact on Baltic countries, the American versus European understanding of the war in Ukraine, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:Ben’s Substack Dog Shirt DailyBen’s speech at a rally in StockholmThe work of Nikita TitovChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, the UN ad hoc committee tasked with elaborating a cybercrime convention is meeting in New York. Delegates will be involved in in-depth negotiations of the draft convention, ahead of the concluding session in January 2024. The cybercrime convention is only one of many initiatives in the growing field of cyber diplomacy. Looming over this work is a big question: Is there enough common ground to pave the path for consensus?Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Ambassador Nathalie Jaarsma, the Netherlands Ambassador at-Large for Security Policy and Cyber. They discussed the tensions plaguing the cyber negotiations in the UN, how diplomacy can help ensure accountability for malicious state behavior in cyberspace, and how to think about progress in the field.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In May 1984, former U.S. Marine, engineer, and early Silicon Valley entrepreneur James Harper was sentenced to life in prison for his central role in an audacious scheme to sell a bevy of classified documents relating to U.S. missile defense to the Soviet bloc and its allies. Four decades later, his story was almost forgotten, until it was rediscovered and investigated by national security reporter Zach Dorfman with help from some of the men who helped catch Harper—and the spy himself. Now, with help from our friends at Goat Rodeo, Dorfman has turned this story into a six-part podcast series entitled “Spy Valley,” which takes a close look at Harper's seminal spy case. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Dorfman to talk over Harper's story and what it can tell us about the relationship between America's national security and those working at the bleeding edge of technological development.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2003, President Bush created the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, and in the twenty years since, the program has been credited with saving over 25 million lives and stabilizing health systems around the world. On Sept. 30, 2023, the program will expire if Congress doesn’t act, putting millions of people at risk of losing access to HIV/AIDS treatment.Lawfare Associate Editor of Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Emily Bass, a writer and activist who has spent more than twenty years writing about and working on HIV/AIDS. In 2021, she wrote “To End a Plague,” a book on America's war on AIDS in Africa. They discussed how PEPFAR has changed over the past two decades, why it is at risk of expiring this fall, and what the expiration would mean for the millions of people who depend on it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s only been a few weeks since Special Counsel Jack Smith indicted Donald Trump. But both he and his lawyers have already been previewing their case in defense: that he was protected by the First Amendment, that he relied on the advice of counsel, and—the glue holding it all together—he really believed what he was saying. We recently published two articles on the subject. The first, by Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani, assesses Trump’s likely defenses. The second, by Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, argues that a jury may well see through them. Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Ben, Saraphin, and Roger to talk through it all.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Fulton County correspondent Anna Bower to talk through the week’s big news down south, including: “Waiting on a Midnight Complaint in Georgia.” Late on Monday night, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis finally indicted Donald Trump alongside eighteen co-conspirators for attempting to interfere with the state of Georgia’s 2020 election results. What does this fourth criminal indictment mean for the universe of legal cases against the former president?“Hunter Becomes the Hunted.” Earlier this week, Attorney General Merrick Garland took the unexpected step of appointing Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss as a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden. What led to this move? And what does it mean for the investigation into the president’s son?“Why So CFIUS?” President Biden has finally issued a long-expected executive order installing some controls on outbound U.S. investments, particularly in relation to China and certain sensitive technology sectors. How big a deal is this new policy?For object lessons, Alan shouted out his latest favorite thriller about a bunch of falsely accused Brits, “Suspicion.” Quinta brought the listeners’ attention to an entertaining court transcript about “fleets.” Scott celebrated the late Paul Reubens’ legacy as Pee-Wee Herman, including his phenomenal 1979 debut on “The Dating Game.” And Anna endorsed her latest courtroom treat, Papa John’s Pizza.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 16, 2022: In order to tell you this story, we need to start at the beginning, just before the U.S. invasion. After 9/11, the CIA set their sights on al-Qaeda’s base in Afghanistan. After a military invasion that fall, people up and down the chain of command learned that in order to fight this war the US needed local partners to help.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Listeners of this podcast are probably familiar with Molly Reynolds’s work on Congress. She’s a Senior Fellow at Brookings and a Senior Editor at Lawfare—and she has a new report out at Brookings, with Naomi Maehr, on “How partisan and policy dynamics shape congressional oversight in the post-Trump era.” Molly and her team have collected an enormous amount of data over the years about how Congress conducts oversight, and the report is a thought-provoking overview of what the legislature got up to during the 117th Congress. Today on the show, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic talked with Molly about her report and what patterns she’s found in oversight from the 116th Congress through today. For fans of the Jan. 6 Committee’s work, they also discussed that committee’s investigation and what it does and doesn’t tell us about congressional investigations going forward.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr. Calder Walton, assistant director of the Applied History Project and Intelligence Project at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, has become one of the world's most highly respected intelligence historians. His most recent book, Spies: The Epic Intelligence War Between East and West, describes the long history of Russian spying--placing it into the wider context of the hundred-year espionage war between the East and West. And this gives him a remarkable perspective on how Soviet and Russian operations against the West have been portrayed in movies and television.David Priess spoke with Calder about his path to researching and writing within the intelligence history subfield; the story of the Mitrokhin archive; the Cambridge Five; the Rosenbergs; Oleg Penkovsky; Aldrich Ames; Robert Hanssen; Russian disinformation campaigns in historical context; enduring popular myths about the master recruits of the KGB; and much more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The article "How Oppenheimer's Atomic Bomb Secrets Were Really Stolen by Soviet Russia," Fortune (July 24, 2023), by Calder WaltonThe play Hamilton and book Alexander Hamilton by Ron ChernowThe book The Sword and the Shield by Christopher AndrewThe book The Mitrokhin Archive by Christopher Andrew and Vasili MitrokhinThe book Defend the Realm: The Authorized History of MI5 by Christopher AndrewThe book The Secret History of MI6 by Keith JefferyThe book Behind the Enigma: The Authorized History of GCHQ by John FerrisThe book Empire of Secrets by Calder WaltonThe book Spies -- digital expansion websiteThe book Spies, Lies, and Algorithms by Amy ZegartChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lawfare Fulton County Correspondent Anna Bower is the author of the Lawfare article entitled, “What the Heck Happened in Coffee County, Georgia?” It is a detailed look back at the computer intrusion that shows up rather prominently in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s election interference indictment. Anna joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk it through. How did all of this information—depositions, court filings, etc.—fall into her lap and reveal this incredible yarn? Why did people associated with the Trump campaign get interested in what happened in Coffee County, Georgia? And how did a team end up taking election system data from the county—in broad daylight—despite it being computer intrusion and theft?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 18, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel unveiled criminal charges against 16 people—the “fake electors” from that state who featured in Trump’s effort to hold onto power in 2020. Just a few weeks later, a special counsel in Michigan announced additional charges related to the 2020 election, this time against three people who allegedly accessed voting machines in the state without authorization. So if you’ve been tracking developments when it comes to accountability for misconduct surrounding the 2020 election, it’s best not to take your eye off Michigan.To discuss, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Clara Hendrickson, a politics reporter at the Detroit Free Press. They talked through the backstory behind these prosecutions and why Michigan became such a hotbed of conspiracy theories and alleged crimes in 2020.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Monday, August 14th, former President Donald Trump was indicted by a grand jury in Fulton County for his alleged attempts to manipulate the electoral vote count in the state of Georgia during the 2020 presidential election. For this emergency edition of the podcast, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down on Lawfare Live with Legal Fellow Anna Bower and Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Scott Anderson to unpack it all.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The district attorney for Fulton Co., Georgia, issued a fourth criminal indictment of former President Donald Trump late last night, for crimes relating to efforts to manipulate the 2020 election results. Lawfare will be hosting a live online discussion of the indictment and what it means. Check our website, lawfaremedia.org, for details and links to watch. Become a Material Supporter of Lawfare to join the conversation live and ask us your questions.The audio from that session will be released as an episode of the Lawfare Podcast after the event.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Aug. 6 former President Donald Trump announced on social media that he would “immediately” seek a “venue change ... out [of] D.C.” of his recent four-count federal indictment in Washington, D.C., for allegedly conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. He cited the city’s overwhelmingly majority liberal political demographics as a reason for transferring the trial’s venue, and called the city “a filthy and crime ridden embarrassment to our nation.”Is Trump likely to succeed in court if he files a motion to transfer venue? Is there any precedent for this? Have other Jan. 6 defendants made similar claims? And how is the Supreme Court likely to interpret this issue?To answer all of these questions and more, Lawfare Associate Editor Katherine Pompilio sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, who has been closely tracking Jan. 6 prosecutions, and recently published a piece on Lawfare unpacking this issue. They discussed what Jan. 6 defendants have argued in their motions to transfer venue, how the Justice Department has responded, and why if Trump files a motion to transfer venue in his Jan. 6 case, it is likely, as Roger puts it, “dead on arrival.” Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott beat back the heat to dig into the week's big national security news stories, including:“ECOWAShed?” We are now several weeks into a coup in Niger, a country once seen as one of the more reliable Western partners in the Sahel region and home to French and U.S. troops who have been helping the Nigerien military combat a local Islamist insurgency. Even as the Nigeria-led Economic Community of West African States, or ECOWAS, has threatened sanctions and intervention to unwind the coup, neighboring states like Burkina Faso and Mali with close ties to Russia and its Wagner Group have threatened a military response in kind. What might this coup mean for the future of the Sahel? And how should the United States be responding?“A Tale of Two Sittings.” Former President Donald Trump is now the subject of two different criminal indictments, each of which is being overseen by a very different judge in very different ways. What should we make of their divergent approaches thus far? And what does it mean for the effectiveness and legitimacy of the justice system in these highly polarizing cases?“KOSA, No Sir.” A bipartisan coalition in Congress has rolled out a new version of the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, that seeks to respond to concerns raised by digital rights and civil liberty groups while still taking steps towards protecting children online. But many on the right and left aren’t having it. What should we make of this new proposal and the reactions it’s provoked?For object lessons, Alan invoked his father-of-a-son credentials to recommend Christine Emba's recent piece, "Men Are Lost. Here's a Map Out of the Wilderness." Quinta recommended the Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett mash-up, "Good Omens" (the book, not the TV show). And Scott shared plans for his homemade improvised pizza oven, which he set up on his gas grill with just some fireproof bricks, two baking steels, and a heavy dose of grit.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 16, 2020: The 2020 presidential election is less than five months away. As the election inches closer and closer, concerns have grown about the possibility that President Trump, should he lose the election, would refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the result. How can we think about that risk? Do we have adequate statutory and constitutional guardrails that protect us from electoral catastrophe? Jacob Schulz sat down with Lawrence Douglas, James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College, and author of the new book “Will He Go? Trump and the Looming Election Meltdown in 2020.” They talked about the vulnerabilities in our electoral system, historical examples of mishaps in presidential elections and how to think about the president’s continued hostility toward elections and, in particular, mail-in voting.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Former President Trump has been arguing for some time now that the criminal charges he’s facing in New York, Florida, and D.C. are politically motivated. At a campaign event in New Hampshire a few days ago, he also complained that the cases are forcing him “to spend time and money away from the campaign trail.” The cases haven’t even gotten to trial yet, but two of them are scheduled to take place during campaign season.Which raises the question: does Trump have to actually attend all of these trials while he’s also running for president? Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Dan Richman, the Paul J. Kellner Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, to discuss. As it turns out, it’s a complicated question.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Katie Benner is a features writer for the New York Times, who covered the Justice Department for a number of years beginning in 2017. In a wide-ranging conversation, she sat down with Lawfare editor-in-chief to talk about the challenges of walking into the Justice Department beat during the Trump administration and covering the post-election uprising within the department. She also gave a textured assessment of the department’s criminal investigation of Trump and other Jan. 6 defendants. And she talks about what makes a Justice Department source, and how the department has changed in the era of Merrick Garland.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The article, "Trump and Justice Dept. Lawyer Said to Have Plotted to Oust Acting Attorney General," by Katie Benner.The article," Louisiana School Made Headlines for Sending Black Kids to Elite Colleges. Here’s the Reality," by Erica L. Green and Katie BennerChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Task Force for a Trustworthy Future Web was put together by the Atlantic Council for a sprint study of the future of trust and safety in the ever-evolving internet. It issued its report, “Scaling Trust on the Web,” at the end of June. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with two members of the task force to talk all about it. Rose Jackson is the Director of the Democracy in Tech Initiative at the Atlantic Council, and Camille François is the Global Director of Trust and Safety at Niantic. They talked about how the task force came to be; about what has been learned about trust and safety from a lot of areas to date, including and especially gaming; and about the challenges in the future as trust and safety scales to new ecosystems.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The increasingly pervasive use and abuse of spyware by governments around the world has led to calls for regulation and even outright bans. How should these technologies be controlled? Asaf Lubin, an Associate Professor of Law at Indiana University's Maurer School of Law, thinks that the best path forward is an international agreement that would regulate, but not outlaw, these important national security and crime-fighting tools. He's just published a paper for Laware's ongoing Digital Social Contract research paper series making his case for what he calls the Commercial Spyware Accreditation System. Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare spoke with Asaf about why current efforts to control spyware are insufficient and why only a global regime can do the job.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Just weeks ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the life sentence of a Yemini national serving out his time at the Guantanamo Bay detention center. He had appealed this life sentence, in part on the grounds that his conviction was based on evidence obtained by torture. Meanwhile, at the Guantanamo military commissions, another detainee tried to appeal charges against him on the basis that torture-obtained evidence was used in his referral for trial by the military commissions—but in June, the body that reviews referrals for trials at Guantanamo denied this appeal. He and his co-defendants are currently set to have pre-trial hearings in October. All of this is happening despite the fact that in 2022, in a case about a different Guantanamo detainee, the Biden administration’s Justice Department committed to a reinterpretation of a key statute that blocks the use of torture-obtained evidence in Guantanamo litigation and reaffirmed that it would not try to admit statements that the detainee gave while in CIA custody. So how and why is it that torture-obtained evidence still seems to be being used in certain GTMO cases? To understand the issues, Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han spoke to Scott Roehm, Director of Global Policy and Advocacy at the Center for Victims of Torture, and an Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown Law School. They talked about the history of torture evidence at GTMO, dove into a few cases in context of the Justice Department’s 2022 re-interpretation, and discussed what this all might mean for other GTMO detainees moving forward.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the last year, the ADL and GLAAD tracked at least 356 incidents of anti-LGBTQ+ hate and extremism in the U.S. This marks an alarming rise over the past two years of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment and violence. 49% of all incidents were perpetrated by individuals associated with extremist groups. This seems to point toward a much larger recent focus on the LGBTQ+ community by far-right extremists.Lawfare Intern Gia Kokotakis sat down with Meghan Conroy, a Research Fellow at the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab who leads its domestic extremism research portfolio, and Jon Lewis, a Research Fellow at George Washington University's Program on Extremism. Both Jon and Meghan have done significant research on far-right extremist groups and ideologies, as well as their intersections with anti-LGBTQ+ violence. They discussed the role far-right extremist groups previously played in anti-LGBTQ+ violence, what may have caused a spike in violence against the queer community, and how the extremist groups committing these acts of violence differ from our traditional conception of the far right.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes to talk through the week's YUGE national security news, including:“So THAT’s What the Insurrection Act is For.” Former President Trump has been indicted for conspiring to overthrow the results of the 2020 election, including through the insurrection on Jan. 6. And while they haven’t been charged, the indictment names six co-conspirators who were allegedly willing to go to the mat—including former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, who, in one of the darkest moments in the indictment, suggested that the Insurrection Act would be used to deploy the military against anyone who protests the Trump administration’s actions. What does this indictment mean, historically and politically? And where will the trial go from here?“The Spy Who Nagged Me.” The intelligence community is knocking on Congress’s door, hat in hand, asking once again for the renewal for the controversial-but-essential section 702 surveillance authority. But odds seem slimmer than ever this year, not least because the political dynamics around federal law enforcement and intelligence changed so dramatically over the course of the Trump administration. What are the odds of renewal? And what conditions are likely to come if it happens?“Hunter and the Fox.” President Biden’s son Hunter, who has wrestled with substance abuse and mental health issues, is back in the news for at least attempting to plead guilty to an array of criminal offenses—and for congressional testimony alleging that he parlayed access to his father into lucrative business deals. The stories have become a mainstay in conservative media circles and right-wing attacks on President Biden. But how much is smoke and how much is fire?For object lessons, Alan recommended the period thriller “Operation Mincemeat” and its focus on Colin Firth's double-breasted period suits. Quinta sang the praises of the Star Wars section at Disneyland, Galaxy's Edge. Scott endorsed “The Thief Collector,” a charming documentary about a real-world heist and a retired couple's dark double-life. And Ben celebrated his decision to bring "The Orb" out of retirement for the big Trump indictment.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With the indictment and arraignment of former President Donald Trump this past week, Jan. 6 and its aftermath are very much on people's minds. So for today's Lawfare Podcast archive episode, we're bringing you the first episode of our narrative podcast series on precisely that topic. It's called The Aftermath.In this first episode, we looked at the events of Jan. 6 itself and all of the questions about accountability that followed. We recorded this first episode in 2021, long before we knew that Trump would eventually be indicted for his role in all of this. It's a reminder of how things looked at the time.You can listen to the whole first season of The Aftermath on our website, or wherever you get your podcasts.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 27, the Justice Department announced a sprawling civil rights investigation, also known as a pattern or practice investigation, into the City of Memphis and the Memphis Police Department. The announcement came just weeks after the department’s Civil Rights Division released a report of a similar investigation into abuses at the Minneapolis Police Department. Both investigations were motivated, at least in part, by the murder of black men at the hands of police—Tyre Nichols in Memphis and George Floyd in Minneapolis. In a recent article for Lawfare about the Minneapolis report and another report looking at the Louisville Metro Police Department, Christy Lopez wrote: “As with past police investigations, the abuse these reports document is chilling, partly in its frequency and perhaps even more so in conveying how casually abuse can occur in policing.” And yet she remained hopeful, writing that the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department “heralded what could be a new era in police reform.”   Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Christy, a Professor from Practice at Georgetown Law and former Deputy Chief in the Special Litigation Section of the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice, to talk about her extensive experience conducting pattern or practice investigations into police departments and negotiating consent decrees. They talked about the history of these investigations stretching back to the Rodney King beating, the common trends of police abuse that pattern or practice investigations find, and whether or not we’re in the midst of a broader reckoning with ideas of policing and public safety. Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing, including graphic depictions of police violence. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In June 2017, FBI agents arrived at the home of Reality Winner, a translator working for the NSA, to question her about an unauthorized leak of classified information concerning Russian interference in U.S. elections. Six years later, Tina Satter’s new film, “Reality,” tells the story of that fateful day, which led to Winner’s imprisonment. Satter’s screenplay relies almost entirely on a verbatim transcript of Winner’s conversations with the FBI agents. The dialogue is by turns quotidian and suspenseful. "Reality" is partly a psychological thriller as well as an exploration of the mind and motivations of Winner herself. She received the longest prison sentence ever given by a federal court for the unauthorized release of government information to the media. Shane Harris talked with Satter about her film, which is based on her stage play, “Is This a Room.” Satter says she became fascinated with Winner after reading about her arrest in the press. She thought the transcript had dramatic potential. To Satter, it read like the script for a play, with a list of characters and dialogue. “Is This a Room” received critical praise and won important theatre awards. The movie, “Reality,” is streaming on Max. Satter began her theatrical career in Portland, Oregon, and has worked with some of the biggest names in experimental theatre. She now lives and works in New York. Among the works mentioned in this episode:“Reality” on Max: https://www.hbo.com/movies/reality “Is This a Room” review: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/11/theater/is-this-a-room-review.html The New York magazine article that first got Satter interested in Winner's story: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/who-is-reality-winner.html Satter’s production company, Half Straddle: http://www.halfstraddle.com/ Reality Winner’s interview with Rolling Stone: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/reality-winner-interview-prison-nsa-1261844/ Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past eighteen months, Ukraine has served as the stage for a proxy battle between superpowers, with the invading Russians on one side and a U.S.-led coalition of Western allies backing Ukraine on the other. As such, it’s the closest thing we’ve yet seen to what many military strategists believe will be the defining challenge of the next strategic era: a near-peer conflict between two or more technologically sophisticated major powers. In this way, the conflict has served as a canary in the coal mine for new military trends, tactics, and technologies that may soon be brought to bear against the West (or by it). Last month, Shashank Joshi, the Defence Editor for The Economist, published a special report in The Economist outlining what lessons military leaders in the West are taking away from the Ukraine conflict as they prepare their own militaries for their next fight. He sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to talk over his findings and what Ukraine can tell us about the future of war. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Tuesday, a D.C. grand jury voted to indict Donald Trump for a range of crimes that all involve the attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election. For this emergency edition of the podcast, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down on Lawfare Live with Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Roger Parloff, and Quinta Jurecic; Executive Editor Natalie Orpett; and Legal Fellow Anna Bower to unpack it all.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In last month’s landmark settlement, the City of New York agreed to pay over $13 million to a group of 1,380 protestors who “were arrested and/or subjected to force by N.Y.P.D. officers” in Manhattan and Brooklyn in the summer of 2020. The proposed settlement marks “the largest total payout to protesters in a class-action suit in the United States,” according to Akela Lacy at The Intercept. The plaintiffs won the case, at least in part, thanks to the work of SITU Research, a group that conducts visual investigations and “merges data and design to create new pathways for justice.” SITU Research’s work supports activists, advocates, and lawyers, bridging the gap between digital evidence and the communities that can best deploy them towards justice and accountability. Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Brad Samuels, a founding partner at SITU who has overseen the team’s visual investigations for legal and advocacy organizations including The International Criminal Court, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, The Associated Press, Frontline, The United Nations, and many others. They discussed why forensic reconstructions and other visual investigations are so useful in the pursuit of justice for war crimes and other abuses, how Samuels and his colleagues build them, and some of the pushback they get. They also talked about the thorny new questions these new technologies raise, including the dangers of retraumatizing victims. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This past week, the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs held a spirited hearing on an unusual topic: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, or UAPs, the more correct term for what are commonly called UFOs, or Unidentified Flying Objects. The witnesses included two military veterans who claimed to have borne eyewitness to UAPs, and an intelligence community whistleblower who claims to have heard secondhand from contacts about a range of government activity relating to extraterrestrials, including the recovery of alien remains and crashed aircraft. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the witnesses’ testimony has triggered an array of strong reactions, from outright scorn and disbelief to an array of boosters eager to tie it into their own worldviews and conspiracy theories. To talk through the revelations at this hearing and the debate over UAPs more broadly, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with veteran Washington Post national security reporter Shane Harris, who has closely followed the debate over UAPs for many years. They talked about how the witnesses’ testimony fits into the broader universe of reports relating to UAPs, what parts reflect serious policy problems and which don't, and how to separate the wheat from the chaff in the broader UAP debate.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by the long absent Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:“Next Fear in Jerusalem.” This week, Israel’s Knesset voted to abolish the “reasonableness doctrine” that had allowed its courts to review administrative decisions by the executive branch—a revolutionary move that triggered unprecedented protest around the country and a wave of resignations throughout the armed forces and other corners of the country. What is the significance of this change? And what does it mean for the future of Israeli democracy?“Rio Grandstanding.” The Biden administration sued the state of Texas this week for installing barriers across the Rio Grande river, purportedly to stymie the flow of unlawful immigration. Texas, meanwhile, maintains that it has the right to take these measures as part of its sovereign authority as a state. Who has the better of these arguments, and what does it tell us about the state of the law and politics surrounding immigration in the United States?“Gone Fishing.” Despite months of revelations regarding ethical shortcomings by its members, the Supreme Court has thus far resisted efforts to install stronger accountability mechanisms. But earlier this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a measure (along party lines) that would force the Court to do so by directing it to adopt a Code of Ethics. Is this the right approach?For object lessons, Alan recommended that other weekend blockbuster, the new Mission Impossible movie. Quinta gave her (slightly qualified) endorsement to the Barbie movie. Scott wholeheartedly recommended the true winner in this year’s weird movie sweepstakes, the Dungeons & Dragons movie. And Natalie broke the movie streak to join the chorus of praise for the Libby app (hooray public libraries!) and to endorse Mirasa baby clothes, both of which she found a new appreciation of on family leave.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 7, 2020: Jack Goldsmith spoke with Adam Cox and Christina Rodríguez, the authors of "The President and Immigration Law," a new book about the historical rise and operation of a president-dominated immigration system. They discussed the various ways that Congress has delegated extraordinary power over immigration to the president, how what the authors call "de facto delegation" confers massive presidential enforcement discretion that is the basis for programs like the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, and the benefits, costs and legal limits of this system. They also discussed what President Donald Trump accomplished with his immigration program during his term in office and President-elect Biden's possible immigration agenda.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Joshua Geltzer is the Deputy Homeland Security Advisor at the White House, part of the National Security Council staff. He is the president's point person on the reauthorization battle surrounding Section 702, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act section that authorizes broad collection against overseas targets using domestic infrastructure. He joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about 702, the problems it has had, the reasons the government thinks it needs it still and wants it reauthorized, and the tough legislative landscape the government is facing between traditional left anxieties about the statute and those of the Trumpist right.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Creators of science fiction movies and television shows often build worlds with at least some attention to governance systems and international (or interplanetary) political interactions. Sometimes, they develop central plot points out of national security matters, even if they play out in entirely different galaxies or dimensions. So it's not surprising that political scientist and author Stephen Dyson has spent years looking closely at how the genre influences--and, in turn, is influenced by--international relations theory and practice.David Priess hosted Stephen for a conversation about the definitions of science fiction, fantasy, and speculative fiction; teaching international politics in China; how science fiction helps us to understand international relations and how IR inform our viewing of science fiction; politics in the Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica and Star Wars universes; and much more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Otherworldly Politics by Stephen Benedict DysonThe books Imagining Politics, The Blair Identity and Leaders in Conflict by Stephen Benedict DysonThe book Metamorphoses of Science Fiction by Darko SuvinThe YouTube channel UConnPopCastThe TV shows Star Trek (The Original Series), Star Trek: The Next Generation, Battlestar Galactica (2004-2009), Battlestar Galactica (1978-1979), and Game of ThronesThe movies Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope and Rogue OneThe article "Images of International Politics in Chinese Science Fiction: Liu Cixin's Three-Body Problem," in New Political Science (2019), by Stephen Benedict DysonThe book Children of Time by Adrian TchaikovskyThe book Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthyChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Isabelle Kerby-McGowan and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, Brazil’s highest electoral court found that former President Jair Bolsonaro had abused his political power in the 2022 elections because of his conduct in a meeting with foreign ambassadors in Brasília in July 2022. For this violation of the country’s election laws, the electoral court banned Bolsonaro from seeking public office until 2030.  Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Emilio Peluso Neder Meyer, Professor of Constitutional Law at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil, and Thomas Bustamante, Professor of Legal Theory at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil, to discuss Brazil’s search for accountability and justice in the aftermath of the coup attempt on Jan. 8, why the electoral court’s ruling was not so much a legal innovation as a mere application of existing laws, and the significance of President Lula’s decision not to rely on the military in his government’s response. They also discussed what’s next for Bolsonarismo.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The first phase of Israel's judicial overhaul is now law. Huge numbers of people are in the streets, reservists are resigning, the stock market is tanking, and Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes assembled an all-star panel to talk about it.Natan Sachs is the Director of the Center for Middle East Policy and a Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy Program at the Brookings Institution. Amichai Cohen teaches international law and national security law at the Ono Academic College in Israel. And Yuval Shany is the Hersch Lauterpacht Chair in International Law and former Dean of the Law Faculty of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Cohen and Shany are the authors of a string of in-depth articles about the Israeli judicial revolution and the protests they have engendered (see their Lawfare articles here, here, here, here, here, and here). The four of them talked about what the substance of this new law is, what's coming next, whether this is the end of the reform sequence or just the first slice of salami, and about the incredible reaction we have seen from Israeli civil society and from opposition parties.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Former President Trump is facing criminal charges in Florida and New York, and indictments are reportedly likely in Fulton County, Georgia, and Washington, D.C. Two of these are in federal court; two of them are in state courts. Some have facts in common; some are seemingly unrelated. Trump is also involved in multiple civil litigations. And it looks like at least parts of these proceedings will be happening all at once. How does that work? Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Brandon Fox, a partner at the law firm Jenner & Block and former Chief of the Criminal Division in the Central District of California, to talk through how it may all play out. They talked about the challenges Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office and state prosecutors will face, how Trump’s lawyers will leverage those challenges, and what judges are likely to do in response.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 12, the Justice Department appealed the sentences of seven Oath Keepers convicted for Jan. 6-related crimes. Five have been convicted of seditious conspiracy, and two others were convicted of conspiring to obstruct Congress. Lawfare Intern Gia Kokotakis sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, a former lawyer and expert on the Jan. 6 Oath Keepers prosecutions who directly observed the proceedings. They discussed who the defendants are, how their sentences were calculated, and the Justice Department's strategic motivations for filing the appeals.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott got together to NOT talk about that ONE big story that's not quite ripe yet. (You know the one. It involves sandwiches.) But they did chat through some of the week's other big national security news, including:“Against the Grain.” Russia backed out of the Turkey-facilitated Black Sea Grain Initiative this past week, which had allowed much needed Ukrainian grain to arrive in markets, largely in the developing world. Now not only is that avenue cut off, but Russian forces are attacking grain facilities in Odessa, threatening the global food supply. How does this brutal act fit into Russia’s global strategy? And how should the United States and its allies respond?“It’s a War on War.” The culture war is now taking on actual war, as House Republicans have passed a National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) laden with provisions that target Defense Department policies relating to abortion, DEI, and LGBTQ+ issues—measures that are certain not to make it through the Democrat-controlled Senate and may end up putting the annual bill at risk of not being passed at all. How big is the risk of such an impasse? What could it mean for U.S. national security?“Coups are Like Pancakes.” Earlier this week, the New York Times published a report about how former officials in the Trump administration are declaring the first Trump administration a mulligan and outlining plans to dramatically expand presidential power and purge the executive branch if and when Trump returns to the White House for a second time. How seriously should we take these proposals? And what would they mean for democracy if implemented?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From November 18, 2020: In the waning days of his administration, the president has attempted to install a political loyalist as General Counsel of the National Security Agency, a position that is traditionally a merits position, not a political position. He has also issued an executive order that gives the executive branch greater control over the civil service, making it easier to hire and fire people in agencies. It all raises the question: Is Donald Trump attempting to create the very deep state that he has spent the last four years denouncing? To talk over this question in its various permutations, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Susan Hennessey, who recently wrote an article about the NSA General Counsel appointment; Scott Anderson, Lawfare senior editor; and Rudy Mehrbani, senior advisor at Democracy Fund Voice, senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, former assistant to the president and director of presidential personnel and former associate White House counsel in the Obama administration.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 16, the U.S. State Department discovered unauthorized access to its Exchange Online email services and reported it to Microsoft. Almost a month later, on July 11, Microsoft disclosed the attack, and attributed it to a China-based threat actor, which they call Storm-0558. The intrusion granted the hackers access to email accounts at the Commerce and State Departments, including Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, among other targets. Although no classified information was compromised, the cyber espionage campaign comes at a time of tension between the U.S. and China.To discuss the significance of the latest cyber espionage campaign, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, Eugenia Lostri, sat down with Asaf Lubin, Associate Professor of Law at Indiana University Maurer School of Law and a Visiting Professor at Columbia Law School. They talked about what different types of espionage campaigns tell us about tightening U.S.-China competition, how international law can address cyber espionage, and the options available for governments to respond to these type of incidents.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Gaming might seem far removed from national security, but Volko Ruhnke's experience proves otherwise. During his career as an intelligence analyst and manager, he designed and published many commercially successful historical board games that, in turn, informed his work. Additionally, he applied his skills in gaming to training intelligence officers.David Priess hosted Volko for a deep dive about board games that included discussion of various game types, the value of in-person vs. virtual gaming, Volko's intelligence career, his many published games, the use of cards in gameplay, the importance of honoring historicity while avoiding forced recreation of exact historical timelines, similarities between game design and intelligence questions, the collaborative nature of historical boardgaming, why military wargaming matters, complexity in intelligence analysis, games ranging from political coalition management to Polynesian exploration and from the suffrage movement in the early 1900s to the manipulation of public perceptions about the functionality of Machu Picchu, and much more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:Volko Ruhnke's page at GMT GamesThe Kevin McPartland-designed game Conquest of ParadiseThe Alison Collins-designed game Wiñay KawsayChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, the majority staff of the Senate Rules and Governmental Affairs Committee released a report entitled “Planned in Plain Sight: A Review of the Intelligence Failures in Advance of January 6th, 2021,” which explores one of the biggest remaining questions about that day: Why didn’t the government see this coming?Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at Brookings and Senior Editor of Lawfare, sat down with Quinta Jurecic, Senior Editor of Lawfare and Fellow at Brookings, and Ryan Reilly, Justice Reporter at NBC News, to discuss the report’s findings, how it fits in with other investigations about the insurrection, and where we go from here. You can also find Molly and Quinta’s article on the report on Lawfare.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a big day in the legal travails of Donald Trump. We awoke this morning to news from the former president himself that he had received another target letter from special counsel Jack Smith, this time from the Jan. 6 grand jury. An indictment seems to be imminent. Incoming Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower spent the day in federal court in Fort Pierce, where Judge Aileen Cannon was hearing the first major status conference of the Mar-a-Lago case. And just as Anna was coming out of court, the Attorney General of Michigan announced that she had brought cases against several fake electors from the 2020 election in that state.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Anna and with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff for a live taping of The Lawfare Podcast to go over it all. What do we know about the apparently forthcoming new case against Donald Trump? What do we know about the fake electors case in Michigan? And what happened in the courtroom when Judge Cannon faced her first hearing as the presiding judge in the Mar-a-Lago case?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a busy weekend in the waters off of Ukraine and Russia. The Ukrainians hit—for the second time—the Kerch Bridge, which connects the Russian mainland with occupied Crimea. The Russians, meanwhile, announced that they are not renewing the Black Sea Grain Initiative, the complex agreement by which Ukraine has managed to export grain through the port of Odessa.What do we know about what happened on the Kerch Bridge? How big a deal is it? Is it connected to the Russian withdrawal from the grain initiative? And what does the scotching of the Black Sea Grain Initiative mean for the Ukrainian economy? To chew it all over, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Dmitri Alperovitch of Silverado Policy Accelerator and the Geopolitics Decanted podcast, and Mykhailo Soldatenko, a visiting researcher at the Harvard Law School and an international lawyer who has written for Lawfare about the Black Sea Grain Initiative. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The only thing more impressive than the performance of generative AI systems like GPT-4 and Stable Diffusion is the sheer volume of training data that went into these systems. GPT was reportedly trained on, essentially, the entire Internet, while Stable Diffusion and other image-generation models rely on hundred of millions if not billions of existing pieces of artwork. Of course, much of this content is copyrighted, and the authors and artists whose work is being used to train these models and, potentially, threaten their own livelihoods are paying attention. A number of high-profile lawsuits are making their way through the courts, and the outcome of these cases could hugely shape, and potentially even stop, progress in machine learning.To explore these issues, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Pam Samuelson, the Richard M. Sherman Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California at Berkeley and one of the pioneers in the study of digital copyright law. She's just published a new piece in the journal Science titled "Generative AI meets copyright,” in which she analyzes the current litigation around generative AI and where it might lead.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Ravi Agrawal, Editor in Chief of Foreign Policy Magazine, to talk through the week’s big natsec news, including: “Pledge Week.” In a sign of strength, NATO held its annual summit in the capital of Vilnius this week, just kilometers from Lithuania’s border with Belarus. But those hoping to join the club have gotten mixed receptions, with NATO members securing a clear path for Sweden to join the alliance without presenting a clear way forward for embattled Ukraine. What did we learn about the state of the alliance from this week’s historic meeting?“Cluster Ruck(us).” Late last week, the Biden administration made the controversial decision to provide U.S. cluster munitions—a type of weapon that many U.S. allies have banned by treaty, due to concerns about civilian casualties—to its ally Ukraine. Is it the right move? And what might it mean on the battlefield—and after the war is over?“Needling and Threads.” Mark Zuckerberg appears to have finally gotten under the skin of tech billionaire Elon Musk, as his recently launched competitor to Musk’s beleaguered Twitter, Threads, launched last week and soon secured over 100 million users. Has Twitter finally met its match? And what will Threads and other competitors mean for the future of the information (and disinformation) economy? Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 8, 2020: On Monday, Lawfare released the first paper in its "The Digital Social Contract" paper series. For each paper, Alan Rozenshtein will be doing a podcast interview with the author, and the first guest is law professor Kyle Langvardt of the University of Nebraska College of Law. His paper, "Platform Speech Governance and the First Amendment: A User-Centered Approach," examines how the First Amendment should and should not apply to the content moderation decisions of major internet platforms. Plus, Alan and Benjamin Wittes have a brief discussion to introduce the paper series as a whole.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, just wrapped up, and the big news is that Sweden is in, and Ukraine is not. Eric Adamson of the Atlantic Council and the Swedish Defense Association is a Swedish defense policy analyst who observed the NATO summit. He joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to discuss the two big things that happened: the Swedish resolution of the dispute with Turkey that impeded Swedish NATO accession until now, and the frustrating failure of NATO to set a path for Ukrainian NATO membership. They talked about the dispute between Sweden and Turkey and the nuanced manner in which it was resolved, about whether the Ukrainians are being too demanding and should be more grateful for Western support, and the specific areas in which Sweden will contribute to NATO's capabilities.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kori Schake is the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute. She has also worked in policy positions at the State Department, the Defense Department and the White House, taught at West Point, and more recently, served on the commission tasked with renaming military bases named for confederate figures. She sat down with Lawfare's editor in chief Ben Wittes, to talk about her unusually diverse career in national security, her work at AEI in a period when principled conservatism isn’t popular, and about the recent NATO summit.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this year, Donald J. Trump became the first former president to be criminally indicted. A few months later, he became the first former president to be indicted a second time, this time in federal court. And it’s not clear that he is done, as Trump and his close associates remain at the center of at least two and possibly more ongoing criminal investigations that have not yet resulted in charges. Nor are Trump’s legal troubles limited to the criminal side of the ledger, as he and the Trump Organization he runs are also involved in a number of ongoing civil lawsuits. As a result, the leading candidate for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination is expected to spend much of that year in court. To get a sense of the complex litigation landscape facing the president and to catch up on the latest developments, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lawfare’s two leading trial watchers: Senior Editor Roger Parloff and incoming Legal Fellow Anna Bower. They talked about the criminal cases Trump is facing, what charges may yet be coming down the pike, and how his overlapping trials—and the forthcoming election—fit into his apparent legal defense. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 4, a federal judge in Louisiana issued one of the most dramatic First Amendment rulings in recent memory. The case involves a variety of individuals, organizations, and conservative state governments who accuse the Biden administration of unconstitutional "jawboning”—that is, informally pressuring social media companies to censor speech, especially about controversial topics like COVID vaccines and election integrity.Describing the allegations as the "most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history," Judge Terry Doughty enjoined by name dozens of high-level Biden administration officials, and potentially thousands more unnamed government employees, from communicating with social media companies about taking down First Amendment-protected user content.If the opinion stands, it will have a dramatic effect on the ability of the government to communicate with social media platforms, a practice that administrations of both parties have engaged in for years. Earlier this week, Judge Doughty rejected a motion from the government to stay the injunction pending appeal; the government has since asked the Fifth Circuit to do so instead and, in a sign of how seriously it is taking the ruling, has signaled that it may ask the Supreme Court to step in if the Fifth Circuit does not.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke to two of the leading experts on the government's relationship with social media platforms to work through the implications of this decision. Derek Bambauer is the Irving Cypen Professor of Law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law and is the author of an influential law review article on jawboning in the context of internet speech. Jeff Kosseff is an associate professor of cybersecurity law in the United States Naval Academy and a Lawfare contributing editor and the author of numerous books and articles about online speech issues.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What are the latest trends in the ransomware-as-a-service ecosystem? Since at least May 27, the CL0P ransomware gang has been exploiting a previously unknown vulnerability to exfiltrate data from financial services organizations, energy corporations, government agencies, and even universities. The group appears to be changing tactics—while it was previously known for its use of the “double extortion” tactic of stealing and encrypting victim data, it seems to now be relying mostly on data exfiltration instead.To discuss the latest changes in the ransomware ecosystem, Eugenia Lostri, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, sat down with Charl van der Walt, Head of Security Research at Orange Cyberdefense. Charl is one of the authors of a report analyzing recent cyber extortion activity. They talked about the ransomware-as-a-service ecosystem, the impact the Russian invasion of Ukraine had on ransomware activity in the past year, and what law enforcement is doing to disrupt cybercriminal networks.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Eric Goldstein is the Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, having served previously as Global Head of Cybersecurity Policy Strategy and Regulation at Goldman Sachs, where he led development of the firm's cybersecurity risk management program, and in cybersecurity positions in DHS, as well as practicing cybersecurity law in the private sector. David Kris, Lawfare Contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare Contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Eric to talk about all things cybersecurity, including the U.S. National Cybersecurity Strategy and U.S. government cyber lanes in the road. Eric also discusses ransomware and what it's like for a lawyer to serve in an operational position. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott sat down to talk over the week's post-Independence Day national security news, including:“Oy Revolt.” Israel launched a major military operation aimed at uprooting terrorist bases in the refugee camp outside the city of Jenin in the West Bank this week. But as is so often the case, the operation not only proved deadly for Palestinian civilians but has become a point of controversy in the international community. What does this operation say about Israel’s security strategy? “Nationwide Disjunction.” On July 4, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a nationwide injunction ordering the Biden administration not to engage with social media platforms over First Amendment protected speech, arising out of complaints about its handling of COVID-19 information (or misinformation). What is the basis for this order, how realistic is it, how sustainable is it, and what does it tell us about the weird legal dynamics surrounding this set of issues at the moment?“A la Modi.” Indian President Narendra Modi is having a moment. This week he is sitting down with Chinese and Russian leaders, hosting a virtual face-to-face of the Shanghai Cooperative. This just a week after he was feted by President Biden and Congress here in Washington, D.C. What are we to make of India’s new global prominence?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 17, 2015: This week, Ben and Matt Waxman sat down with Daniel Reisner, former head of the International Law Branch of the Israeli Defense Forces and current partner with Herzog, Fox and Neeman. Reisner has also served as a senior member of Israel’s peace delegations over the years, participating in negotiation sessions and summits including those at Camp David. He continues to advise senior members of the Israeli government on a variety of issues relating to international law and operational security issues. Colonel Reisner was in New York on a visit sponsored by Academic Exchange for a series of events and discussions on contemporary national security challenges. His experiences set up a wide-ranging conversation touching on everything from the law of targeted killing to the role of morality in operational law advice.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

“But what about Hillary Clinton's emails,” a thousand voices have shouted since the Trump Mar-a-Lago indictment came down. It's not just politicians; it's commentators in serious magazines who seem to think that Trump's conduct is no different from that of the former secretary of state.Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff writing in Lawfare on June 26 found 703 different ways in which Trump's Mar-a-Lago conduct bears no resemblance to Clinton’s emails, and he joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about them. With him was Pete Strzok, a former FBI special agent who ran the Hillary Clinton email investigation. He was there to talk about the investigation, how it differed from the Trump Mar-a-Lago investigation, and whether Roger is correct that the two could not be more different.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Political scientist Ethan Scheiner appeared on Chatter in early 2022, right before the Olympics in Beijing, to talk about the fascinating intersection of politics, security, and Olympic events. This week, he returns to talk about the compelling connections between hockey and international relations--with a special focus on Czechoslovakia before, during, and after the Cold War. His new book, Freedom To Win, uses the stories of a range of larger-than-life characters across several decades to describe the importance of international hockey play to the Czech and Slovak national experience and to increase awareness of a too-little-known quest for freedom from oppression.David Priess and Scheiner discussed the broad intersection of hockey and politics, the intensity of the Swedish-Finnish rivalry on the ice, the origins of the game in Europe, how Czechoslovakian hockey players used their sport to fight back against Soviet domination, the 1969 Ice Hockey World Championships in Stockholm, prominent sports figures' defections from the Warsaw Pact countries during the Cold War, the internationalization of the US National Hockey League, hockey in the former Czechoslovakia after the end of Communist rule in Eastern Europe, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The Chatter episode The Olympics, Politics, and SecurityThe book Freedom to Win: A Cold War Story of the Courageous Hockey Team that Fought the Soviets for the Soul of its People--and Olympic Gold, by Ethan ScheinerChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, is one of the most important national security offices that you have probably never heard of. Responsible for reviewing foreign investment in the United States for possible national security threats, its jurisdiction and scope of work has expanded dramatically in recent years—and may be on the verge of expanding once again, as the Biden administration considers installing similar measures for outbound U.S. investment.To discuss, Lawfare Contributing Editor Brandon Van Grack and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Assistant Treasury Secretary for Investment Security Paul Rosen, whose office oversees the CFIUS process, for the first of what we are calling “The Regulators”: a special series Lawfare is co-sponsoring with our friends at the law firm Morrison Foerster, where Brandon is a partner, featuring one-on-one discussions with the senior officials that are implementing our new era of economic statecraft. They discussed how the CFIUS process works in practice, how it’s changed, and what challenges sit on the horizon, both for U.S. policymakers and the businesses they interact with.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In April, former Vice President Mike Pence testified before a federal grand jury under subpoena as part of the special counsel’s investigation into January 6. The testimony came after the district court rejected Pence’s challenge to the validity of the subpoena under the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution. And now, months later, Chief Judge James Boasberg has unsealed his ruling on the matter, along with other documents related to Pence’s challenge.When news of the subpoena first broke, Lawfare Senior Editors Molly Reynolds and Quinta Jurecic sat down with Mike Stern and Eric Columbus on the Lawfare Podcast to talk through the issues raised. Now that we have more details about just what took place, Molly and Quinta invited Mike and Eric back to discuss what they made of Pence’s argument and the court’s decision, and what this episode adds to our understanding of the Jan. 6 investigation more broadly.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 11, 2019: More than two years after the 2016 presidential election, new information continues to seep into the public about the extent of Russia's sweeping and systematic efforts to interfere in the U.S. democratic process. With the 2020 presidential election on the horizon, last week, Stanford's Cyber Policy Center published a report on securing American elections, including recommendations on how the U.S. can protect elections and election infrastructure from foreign actors.On Monday, Susan Hennessey spoke with two of the report's authors: Alex Stamos, director of the Stanford Cyber Policy Center's Internet Observatory and former Chief Security Officer of Facebook, and Nate Persily, Stanford law professor and expert on election administration. They talked about what happened in 2016, and the enormously complex landscape of defending not just election infrastructure but also preserving the integrity of the information ecosystems in which Americans make their decisions about how to vote, including the possible consequences of regulating foreign media.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Until this year, Tim Wu was Special Assistant to President Biden for competition and tech policy. One of the leading thinkers in progressive approach to antitrust, Tim has since returned to Columbia Law School, where he is the Julius Silver Professor of Law, Science and Technology. Since leaving government, Tim has been offering his thoughts on how the government should regulate artificial intelligence.Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Tim about his experience in government, whether he's concerned about AI's existential risks, and what his priorities would be for making sure that AI serves society's, and not just the private sector's, interests. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by their colleague and think-tank neighbor, Russia/Ukraine expert Eric Ciaramella, to talk over the week's big news, including:“Going All (Prigozh)in.” Yevgeny Prighozin, leader of the mercenary Wagner Group, went all in this past week, marching his troops into Russia and halfway to Moscow for the stated purpose of removing Russia’s military leadership, only to abruptly halt and accept exile in Belarus instead. What does this mean for the conflict in Ukraine—and future of the Putin regime?“Lost at Sea.” In a busy week of news, one story has gotten surprisingly little attention: the tragic sinking of an overcrowded smugglers’ boat off the coast of Greece that claimed the lives of hundreds of migrants. What does this incident tell us about the dynamics of the migrant crisis in the Mediterranean—and how the world views it?“Moore, Moore, Moore! (How do YOU like it?)” The Supreme Court issued decisions in three major cases this past week, including addressing the much-discussed Independent State Legislature Doctrine in Moore v. Harper. What did the Court decide, and what will these decisions mean?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 23, 2020: It's been a wild couple of days of disinformation in the electoral context. Intelligence community officials are warning about Russian and Iranian efforts to influence the U.S. presidential election—and claiming that Iran is responsible for sending threatening emails from fake Proud Boys to Democratic voters. What exactly is going on here? To talk through the developments and the questions that linger, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Scott R. Anderson, Susan Hennessey and Quinta Jurecic.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Thursday, South Africa’s Department of International Relations confirmed it would host the 15th BRICS Summit in August. Normally, this wouldn’t make the news. But because South Africa is a signatory to the International Criminal Court, the country is obligated under international law to arrest one of the summit’s invitees—Russian President Vladimir Putin—the moment he sets foot in Johannesburg.This presents South Africa with what Nosmot Gbadamosi has dubbed a “Putin problem.” Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Nosmot, a multimedia journalist and the writer of Foreign Policy’s weekly Africa Brief, to discuss this diplomatic dilemma, why U.S.-South Africa relations have withered in recent months, and the incoherent Russia-Ukraine “peace mission” led by President Cyril Ramaphosa just weeks ago. They also discussed what the late Eusebius McKaiser has called South Africa’s “nonsensical nonalignment” since the Russian invasion of Ukraine last year and what nonaligment even means in light of the war.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Shane sits down with law professor and hacker historian Scott Shapiro to rant, and rave, about hacker movies. From War Games to the Die Hard franchise to TV’s “Mr. Robot,” Hollywood has portrayed hackers as heroes and villains. Sometimes filmmakers get the art and culture of hacking right. Sometimes they get basic technology very wrong. But the results are almost always entertaining. Scott is a professor at Yale Law School and the author of the new book Fancy Bear Goes Phishing: The Dark History of the Information Age, in Five Extraordinary Hacks. Here’s a list of movies Shane and Scott discussed:War Games https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm Sneakershttps://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105435/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Live Free or Die Hard, aka Die Hard 4   https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0337978/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1  Snowden https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3774114/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Mr. Robot https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4158110/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_7_nm_1_q_mr%2520robot Hackers https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113243/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 The Net https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113957/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Die Hard 2 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099423/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8_nm_0_q_die%2520hard%25202 Scott’s book, Fancy Bear Goes Phishinghttps://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374601188/fancybeargoesphishing Scott on Twitter https://twitter.com/scottjshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Scott’s interview on the Lawfare podcast about his book https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dark-history-of-the-information-age/id498897343?i=1000614119459Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How much transparency do big technology companies owe to their users? The question has become pointed in recent years as users, researchers, and politicians voice discontent about the absence of public information available about how platforms moderate and amplify content. Today, Meta’s President of Global Affairs, Nick Clegg, announced a new initiative to provide more information about how the company’s ranking algorithms work on Facebook and Instagram. On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, Lawfare’s occasional series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein talked with Clegg about how Meta has approached transparency for both users and researchers. They also discussed Clegg’s controversial 2021 essay on how Meta’s algorithms interact with user preferences.Meta provides support for Lawfare’s Digital Social Contract paper series. This podcast episode is not part of that series, and Meta does not have any editorial role in Lawfare.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States in the early 21st century has been involved in a so-called “forever” war involving military threats, interventions, occupations, counterinsurgencies, and the like. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the United States engaged in an at least superficially analogous many-decades series of interventions in the Western Hemisphere with the aim of achieving regional hegemony.This earlier period is the topic of a new book by Sean Mirski, an attorney at Arnold & Porter and a visiting scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. The book is called “We May Dominate the World: Ambition, Anxiety, and the Rise of the American Colossus.” Jack Goldsmith sat down with Sean to discuss what he describes as the United States’ “regional rampage of staggering scope and scale” in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the aims and consequences of these military adventures, and the lessons they hold for today, both for U.S. foreign policy and for understanding the aims of rising powers like China. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a heck of a weekend in Russia. There was an insurrection, kind of? A coup, sort of? A column of troops led by Wagner chieftain Yevgeny Prigozhin marched toward Moscow from Rostov-on-Don, threatened the destabilization of the Putin regime, and then in a sudden back flip, everybody stood down and the whole thing was resolved in a weird deal between the Russian president and the renegade mercenary.To talk it all through, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Alina Polyakova, President of the Center for European Policy Analysis; cybersecurity guru and Lawfare Contributing Editor Matt Tait; and Dmitri Alperovitch of the Silverado Policy Accelerator. They talked about what happened over the weekend, what they know and what they think, what it might mean for Vladimir Putin's regime, and what it might mean for the war in Ukraine. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Countries across Africa are procuring and employing surveillance tools from China. This trend is a product of China’s diplomatic strategy, its technological ambitions, and growing corporate power and reach, as well as African domestic demands. A white paper from the Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) at the Atlantic Council argues that research on this topic disproportionately focuses on the motivations and ambitions of the supplier, and seeks instead to focus on the local features that drive the adoption of Chinese surveillance tools.Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, Eugenia Lostri, sat down with Bulelani Jili, the author of the white paper. Bulelani is a fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Cyber Statecraft Initiative, and a Meta Research Ph.D. Fellow at Harvard University. They discussed the supply and demand drivers for surveillance technology in Africa, the risks to civil liberties that come from the deployment of these technologies without proper checks and balances, and how all this fits in the context of U.S.-China competition.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by UVA Law Professor Paul Stephan to talk through the close-calls in this week’s national security news, including:“Xi’s All That.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Beijing this past week, for a long delayed sit-down with President Xi Jinping to try and de-escalate the two superpowers’ tense relationship. Was this meeting a smart move or a giveaway? And what should we make of President Biden calling the Chinese leader a “dictator” shortly after Blinken’s return?“Adverse REPOssession.” The question of what to do with the $300 billion in Russia-related assets frozen by the United States and its allies has reemerged, with members of Congress recently introducing a new version of the REPO Act that would seize those assets and make them available as reparations for Ukraine, among other purposes. Is seizure the right way to handle these assets? What challenges and risks might such a dramatic step encounter?“Robo Joe.” President Biden joined a summit of leaders in the AI industry this week as part of his administration’s ongoing effort to seriously engage the policy challenges raised by AI technology. But what are the realistic prospects for regulation? And what form should it take?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 9, 2019: President Trump has declared that he will fight “all the subpoenas” coming from Congress and has claimed “absolute immunity” for White House advisors. In doing so, he has brought the issue of congressional oversight of the executive branch to the front pages. To talk about that very issue, Margaret Taylor sat down with Austin Evers, the executive director of American Oversight, a non-profit government accountability watchdog; and Michael Stern, who served for many years as the Senior Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives. Stern is the founder of the Point of Order blog, which covers legal issues affecting Congress. They talked about pending oversight litigation, the House of Representatives’ strategy, how the Trump administration is responding, and if any of this is normal.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As large language models like ChatGPT play an increasingly important role in our society, there will no doubt be examples of them causing harm. Lawsuits have already been filed in cases where LLMs have made false statements about individuals, but what about run-of-the-mill negligence cases? What happens when an LLM provides faulty medical advice or causes extreme emotional distress?A forthcoming symposium in the Journal of Free Speech Law tackles these questions, and Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with three of the symposium's contributors at the University of Arizona and the University of Florida: law professors Jane Bambauer and Derek Bambauer, and computer scientist Mihai Surdeanu. Jane's paper focuses on what it means for a LLM to breach its duty of care, and Derek and Mihai explore under what conditions the output of LLMs may be shielded from liability by that all-important Internet statute, Section 230.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since joining Lawfare in November 2021, Roger Parloff has been a constant presence at the January 6th trials. Now based in Washington, D.C, he had, earlier in his career, served as a staff writer for Fortune and American Lawyer Magazine, and has been published in The New York Times, Yahoo Finance, ProPublica, New York, NewYorker.com, and Air Mail News. As a senior editor at Lawfare, he's focused on January 6 related matters, including covering the more than 1,000 federal criminal cases that have been filed while also keeping up on the pending investigations of higher-ups.In his conversation with Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare’s editor in chief and this week’s Chatter guest host, Roger talks about giving live play-by-play of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers trials, the Venue Transfer Motions filed by many Jan. 6th defendants, the other journalists and "sedition hunters" who have been crucial in gathering information and reporting on the Jan. 6th cases, and more.Parloff’s latest essay on Lawfare on this subject is entitled: “Should Nine Oath Keepers Receive Terror-Enhanced Sentences?”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At the United Nations, Russia's obstruction of efforts to respond to its invasion of Ukraine is finally sparking serious interest in an issue that has long simmered in the background of global politics: reform of the UN Security Council to make it a larger and more inclusive body. In contrast to prior U.S. administrations, the Biden administration is at the tip of the spear of this effort and may be preparing to release a reform proposal of its own in the coming weeks.To better understand this forthcoming proposal and the context that has led to it, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Richard Gowan, an experienced UN watcher and current UN Director at the International Crisis Group. They discussed why the Ukraine conflict has sparked an interest in Security Council reform, what reform is likely to look like, and who stands to benefit the most.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Carolyn Cole, a Pulitzer-Prize winning staff photographer for the Los Angeles Times, has covered wars and other conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kosovo, Liberia, Sudan, Nicaragua, Haiti, and the U.S.-Mexico border. Over the course of her 30 year career, she has been seriously injured on the job precisely once—when members of the Minnesota State Patrol pushed Cole over a retaining wall and pepper sprayed her so badly that her eyes were swollen shut. Cole was in Minneapolis in the summer of 2020 to cover the protests after the murder of George Floyd. She was wearing a flak jacket marked TV, a helmet, and carried press credentials at the time of her attack. Cole’s story is not unique among the press corps. According to a new report out this week from the Knight First Amendment Institute called “Covering Democracy: Protests, the Police, and the Press,” in 2020, at least 129 journalists were arrested while covering social justice protests and more than 400 suffered physical attacks, 80 percent of them at the hands of law enforcement. As Joel Simon, author of the report and former Executive Director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, writes, “The presence of the media is essential to dissent; it is the oxygen that gives protests life. Media coverage is one of the primary mechanisms by which protesters’ grievances and demands reach the broader public.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Joel, as well as Katy Glenn Bass, the Research Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, to discuss the report, the long legacy of law enforcement attacks on journalists covering protests in America, who counts as “the press” in the eyes of the court, and what can be done to better ensure press freedom. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last November, President Trump became candidate Trump when he formally announced his campaign to retake the White House in 2024. And when, earlier this month, the Department of Justice indicted Trump over his unauthorized possession of classified documents, it gave him another title: defendant Trump.How will all of these roles interact with each other on a legal and logistical level? How will the obligations of defendant Trump interfere with candidate Trump's ability to conduct his presidential campaign? And if candidate Trump becomes convicted-felon Trump and also President Trump, what then?To think through these issues, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with two members of the Lawfare extended universe: Stephanie Pell, Lawfare Senior Editor and a former federal prosecutor in the southern district of Florida, and Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State and one of the foremost experts on presidential disqualification and removal.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 19, 2019: A redacted version of the 448-page Mueller report dropped yesterday, and there’s a lot to say about it. In this Special Edition of the Lawfare Podcast, Bob Bauer, Susan Hennessey, Mary McCord, Paul Rosenzweig, Charlie Savage and Benjamin Wittes discuss what the report says about obstruction and collusion, Mueller’s legal theories and what this all means for the president and the presidency.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower fresh from the Miami court system to discuss the week's yuge national security news story—and one more for good measure:“Aileen, Aileen, Aileen, Aileen! Please don’t take this case just ‘cuz you can.” Former President Donald J. Trump was arraigned in federal court on Tuesday, the first step in a criminal trial expected to be overseen by none other than our old friend Judge Aileen Cannon. Will the charges for unlawful retention or obstruction of justice stick? And where is the trial likely to go from here?“It’s Arraignin’ Men.” The indictment of Trump in the Mar-a-Lago investigation is the first of its kind. But will it be the last? What else is the special counsel investigating? And are there other charges he might pursue, against Trump or others?“Xi Guevara.” Washington is up in arms over a spy station China is setting up in Cuba—or might have been operating for years. How big a deal is this? Are the reactions high-minded or hyperbole?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 28, 2018: On Thursday, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates hosted a conference at Georgetown Law on the future of American democracy. Matt Axelrod, Bob Bauer, John Bellinger, Jack Goldsmith, and Don Verrilli participated in a panel on the norms that govern contacts between the White House and the Justice Department, how the Trump administration has broken them, and what can be done to protect the Justice Department’s independence in this administration and future ones.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Monday, 16 young plaintiffs—between the ages of 5 and 22—walked into a packed courtroom in Helena, Montana, to sue their government. At issue is a 1972 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing that the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.” 22-year-old Rikki Held and her co-plaintiffs allege that state officials violated that constitutional right. The case, Held v. Montana, now over a decade in the making, is truly historic—the first-ever constitutional climate lawsuit to reach trial in the United States.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at the Columbia Law School to talk through what’s at stake in this landmark case. They discussed the origins of the trial, its potential ripple effects, and where Held v. Montana sits in the landscape of climate change litigation around the world. Other reading of interest:This climate newsletter from Annie Crabill at The EconomistSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Water, essential to the emergence and endurance of life on Earth, has both spurred technological advances and driven many types of conflict. For the first time in humanity's long history with water, we are starting to suffer the consequences of widespread unsustainable water use, and we soon will face a crucial collective choice about what future generations' interactions with water will look like.Hydroclimatologist Peter Gleick has studied the issues at the intersection of water, climate change, security, and conflict for decades; he recently wrote The Three Ages of Water to bring together much of his life's work on how water has shaped the course of human history and why acting now is so vital for fostering a sustainable hydrologic future. David Priess hosted him for a conversation covering his early interest in hydrology, the importance of interdisciplinary studies for water issues, early civilizations' relationship with water, ancient epic flood stories, early legal codes' attention to water conflict, the scientific revolution's water impacts, water poverty, the difference between so-called water wars and conflicts involving water, Hollywood's portrayals of water conflicts, NASA's GRACE satellites, the peak water debate, the path to a more sustainable future, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book The Three Ages of Water by Peter GleickThe article "Water and Conflict: Fresh Water Resources and International Security," International Security (1993) by Peter GleickThe article "Environment and Security: The Clear Connections," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (2015) by Peter GleickThe book Bottled and Sold by Peter GleickThe Water Conflict Chronology project at the Pacific InstituteThe Water at the Movies compilation by Peter GleickThe movie The Treasure of the Sierra MadreThe movie Mad Max: Fury RoadThe movie WaterworldThe movie Quantum of SolaceThe movie V is for VendettaThe movie Dune (1984)The book Dune by Frank HerbertChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The first 31 counts of the Trump Mar-a-Lago indictment all are under the Espionage Act, which has led to a lot of confusion because Trump is not accused of spying. Heidi Kitrosser is a professor of law at Northwestern University and an expert on the Espionage Act. She wrote a recent piece in Lawfare about the Espionage Act and its history of prosecutions during the Trump Administration. She joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the law, its history, the problems with it, and how overbroad it is in some areas—and why none of those areas implicate the Trump indictment. It's an interesting conversation that covers media prosecutions, prosecutions of leakers, and prosecutions of spies, and it will give you all the background you need to understand the controversy about the charges against Trump. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Donald Trump was arraigned Tuesday in Miami, FL, in connection with the Mar-a-Lago indictment. Lawfare's Fulton County Correspondent Anna Bower was in the courtroom and immediately after the hearing, she joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic before a live YouTube audience to debrief on the whole thing. They talked about what happened in the courtroom, Trump's conditions of release, counsel, and what happened in “The Line” getting into the courtroom—27 hours of waiting before the hearing actually started.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This weekend, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes had a conversation on Read With Me, a by-subscription-only podcast associated with Ben’s Substack Dog Shirt Daily. In this episode, Ben went through the indictment of Donald Trump at great length and with particular care with Lawfare Fulton County Court Correspondent Anna Bower and Lawfare Contributing Editor Matt Tait. It's a line-by-line, page-by-page analysis that we thought might be a good resource for people who are trying to make sense of the indictment—where it's strong, where it raises issues, what issues it raises, and where things might go from here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The indictment filed last week against former President Donald Trump involves hundreds of classified documents, and the first 31 charges involve mishandling individual classified documents. This raises the specter of the Classified Information Procedures Act, or CIPA, which is the major instrument through which we handle classified material in criminal cases. How do you prove that the former president mishandled classified information without presenting a lot of classified information in open court? Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Brian Greer, former CIA lawyer and the man behind the @secretsandlaws Twitter account, to talk about the Justice Department's options for presenting these 31 documents in court, about whether they can be declassified, and about whether the department can use something called the “silent witness rule.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott braved the haze to talk through the week’s (very) big national security news stories, including:“Downstream Effects.” The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam in Ukraine promises a new wave of suffering and environmental devastation for Ukrainians living along the Dnipro River. Who is responsible? And what could the ramifications be?“He’s Off to Meet the Wizard, The Wonderful Wizard of Laws.” Over the past few weeks, there has been a steady drip of information about Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into former President Trump, leading many to conclude that an indictment is on the horizon. What do we know about the state of the investigation? And where does it seem headed?“Party Animals.” The number of contenders in the 2024 Republican presidential primary has officially doubled, with new candidates like Chris Christie and Mike Pence presenting—or being unable to avoid—the legacy of Jan. 6, among other issues with the direction of the party under former President Trump. What does this mean for the shape of the race? And will it mean for the debate over democratic values?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 26, 2020: Ben Buchanan is a professor at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and a scholar on cybersecurity and statecraft. He has a new book out this week: “The Hacker and the State: Cyber Attacks and the New Normal of Geopolitics." Jack Goldsmith sat down with Buchanan to talk about Ben’s new book, about the so-called name-and-shame of Justice Department indictments, and about the various reasons why states engage in offensive cyber operations.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 8, former President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that he has been indicted in Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into the improper removal of classified documents from the White House to Mar-a-Lago. The indictment is currently under seal, but according to news reports, Trump has been indicted on seven counts relating to the improper retention of classified material and conspiracy to obstruct the special counsel investigation. On Friday, June 9, at 5 p.m. ET, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes, alongside Anna Bower and Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Stephanie Pell, and Roger Parloff, will discuss what to make of the reported charges, the cases's reported venue, the Classified Information Procedures Act, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The data broker industry and its role in the digital economy is under scrutiny from Congress. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Justin Sherman, the Founder and CEO of Global Cyber Strategies and a Senior Fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy, to discuss the data broker ecosystem and the recent article he published in Lawfare about two bills from a previous congress that seek to give consumers more control over the information that data brokers collect and sell about them. They talked about some of the scams and other harms caused by data brokers, the regulatory approaches taken by each bill, and whether federal legislation regulating data brokers will get passed.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Shane and David have hosted many former intelligence officers, mostly of the American variety, during more than 80 episodes so far on Chatter. But, until this week, you haven't heard us speak with one who has turned her intelligence experience into a career as a professional genealogist. Lisa Maddox of Family History Investigations has carved out that unique path, and her story reveals much about the nature and wider applicability of analytic skills.David Priess talked to Lisa about her entry into the national security world; the role of intelligence within the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS); differences and similarities among NCIS, DIA, and CIA; her work at CIA as an analyst and manager of analysts; the research, analytic, and presentational aspects of intelligence analysis; structured analytic techniques; the coordination process within the Intelligence Community; the discipline of targeting analysis; her decision to start a genealogy business; how the elements of analysis apply to genealogical work; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The TV show NCISThe TV show Finding Your RootsThe book Vanished Kingdoms by Norman DaviesThe book Demon Copperhead by Barbara KingsolverChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A large dam on the Dnipro River has been destroyed, causing massive flooding and a dangerous environmental catastrophe in southern Ukraine. The Ukrainians are blaming the Russians; the Russians are blaming the Ukrainians. Meanwhile, the Washington Post is reporting that the CIA was actually tipped off about the coming destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines last year—and that it was tipped off that a Ukrainian military team was planning to do it. The blockbuster story is the latest bit of evidence that the Nord Stream operation was, after all, not the Russians, but the Ukrainians. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down in three conversations to discuss the goings on. First, he spoke with Eric Ciaramella, Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and a former CIA analyst and NSC official on Russia and Ukraine, about the scope and scale of the damage the dam break has done. Then Ben spoke with Dmitri Alperovitch, Chairman of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, about the military implications of the dam break. And he spoke with Shane Harris, one of the reporters whose name is on that Washington Post story byline, about his story and what it all means for the future of the Ukraine war. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On January 1, 2023, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was sworn in as president of Brazil. A week later, insurrectionists in Brazil stormed government buildings, including the president’s palace, the Supreme Federal Court, and the National Congress building to violently disrupt the democratic transition of power and challenge the results of the election. Lula, however, remained undeterred and forged ahead. It’s been roughly 150 days since those events, and Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Brian Winter, Editor-in-Chief of Americas Quarterly and a journalist with over a decade of experience living and reporting across Latin America, to discuss how Lula has fared in his first 100 days in office, his vision for reviving Brazil’s place in the world, and the political forces he’s up against.  Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On May 31, CNN reported that federal prosecutors investigating the unlawful removal of classified documents from the White House to Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence have obtained an audio recording in which the former president acknowledges that he knowingly kept a classified Department of Defense document that contained details about a potential attack on Iran. According to CNN, the tape indicates that Trump “understood he retained classified material after leaving the White House.”Trump’s alleged comments made on the recording have sparked a debate about whether he will be charged with violating 18 U.S.C. 793(e) of the Espionage Act.What exactly did Trump say on the tape? Did he violate the Espionage Act? How does this change Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigations? And what does all of this mean for Trump’s reelection campaign? To go over everything that happened, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down for a live recording of the podcast alongside Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff, who unpack all of these questions and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been about six months since the Attorney General issued new guidelines on compulsory process to members of the press in criminal and national security investigations, and two officials of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press—Bruce Brown and Gabe Rottman—wrote a detailed analysis of the document in two parts for Lawfare. Rottman joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to go through the document carefully: the long history that led to it, the shifting policies that have gotten more restrictive over the years since the Supreme Court ruled in Branzburg v. Hayes, the ramp-up of leak investigations and reporter subpoenas in the Obama and Trump administrations, and the new policy that creates a red line policy against them under most (but not all) circumstances. They talked about the document, about why the Justice Department has forsworn a historic and upheld authority, and about what it means for reporters and criminal investigations going forward. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by their Brookings and Lawfare colleague Molly Reynolds to talk all things Congress in the week’s national security news, including:Shattering the Must-Pass Ceiling.” Earlier this week, President Joe Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced a deal on raising the debt ceiling, and thereby avoiding a potential financial catastrophe. The question now is whether they can sell it to enough members of Congress, where right-wing members of McCarthy’s caucus are promising to sink it. Will the deal make it through? And if not, what might come next?“Recep Tayyip Erdo-won.” After a close fought contest, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has emerged victorious from run-offs in Türkiye’s national elections, positioning him for a third term in office and a third decade in power. Does the reelection of the increasingly autocratic figure mean the further decline of Turkish democracy? And Türkiye’s flagging relationship with the West?“I’m Sorry, Dave. I’m Afraid That’s Not Regulation.” The head of several leading AI developers are actively urging Congress to regulate the industry—even as they continue to roll out new products to the public with untested capabilities. How seriously should we take this plea? And is it aimed at the right risk?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 1, 2016: At this week's Hoover Book Soiree, Rosa Brooks joined Benjamin Wittes to talk about her new book, “How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything: Tales from the Pentagon.” The book covers an extraordinary range of territory, from Brooks' personal experiences working as a civilian advisor at the Pentagon, to the history of the laws of war, to an analysis of the U.S. military's expanded role in a world in which the lines between war and peace are increasingly uncertain.How should we think about the military’s responsibilities outside the realm of traditional warfare? And is it desirable, or even possible, to rethink the way we approach the distinctions between wartime and peacetime?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It is often said that “Russia is a country with an unpredictable past.” Such distortions of history can lead to trouble, as the world witnessed last year when Vladimir Putin justified his invasion of Ukraine as an attempt to “denazify” the neighboring country—one with a Jewish president who lost relatives in the Holocaust. As Megan Buskey writes in her new memoir, “Ukraine Is Not Dead Yet: A Family Story of Exile and Return”: “How could a country know itself unless it knew all the things it had been?”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Megan, a nonfiction writer and former Fulbright Fellow to Ukraine, who has studied and written about the country for two decades. They discussed her book, the use and abuse of history in Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and the role of family histories in countering those false narratives. They also talked about the best way to get a Polish archive to give you the documents you need. Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing, including descriptions of sexual and other forms of violence. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alicia Wanless is one of the pioneers of the idea of information ecology, the notion that we should think about information and disinformation as part of a complex ecosystem, the management of which she analogizes to environmental policy. Wanless has been complaining for several years that the war on “disinformation” skates over important question: What are the collateral effects of anti-disinformation policies? How do interventions against information pollution operate in the real world? In her conversation with Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare’s editor in chief and this week’s Chatter guest host, Wanless talks about how she became interested in information management, what’s wrong with the discussion of disinformation, what a more environmentalist approach to information spaces might look like, and what a useful research agenda for the nascent field would focus on. Among the works mentioned in this episode:Wanless’s latest essay on Lawfare: “There’s No Getting Ahead of Disinformation Without Moving Past It.”The book Network PropagandaChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The war in Ukraine is approaching a pivotal moment. Russia remains in control of the hotly contested city of Bakhmut. But the ruthlessly effective mercenary forces of the Wagner Group—the same group whose leader, Yevgeny Prighozin, has openly bickered with the regular Russian military and reportedly offered to trade Russian troop positions to Ukrainian intelligence—are withdrawing. Ukrainian forces, meanwhile, are preparing for a reported counteroffensive, even as unclaimed attacks are taking place across the border in Russia—including, most recently, on a civilian target in Moscow. To discuss these developments, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with two reporters covering the conflict for the Washington Post: Intelligence and National Security Reporter Shane Harris and Ukraine Bureau Chief Isabelle Khurshudyan. They discussed the peculiar role played by the Wagner Group, recent revelations stemming from the Discord leaks, and what to expect from the conflict in the months to come. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Sunday, May 28, Turkey held a bitterly contested run-off election, with incumbent presidential candidate Recep Tayyip Erdoğan winning reelection against opposition candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Soli Özel, Senior Lecturer at Kadir Has University in Istanbul and a columnist at Habertürk daily newspaper, to discuss what was at stake in this election and the future of Turkey as Erdoğan’s next five-year term marks his 25th year in higher office.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tim Mak was an NPR reporter in Kyiv since the beginning of the full-scale invasion last year. He recently stepped down and started his own Substack from the Ukrainian capital, called The Counteroffensive, and Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Tim to talk about the publication. What makes a reporter leave an established news organization like NPR to start a startup in a war zone? What is The Counteroffensive going to cover? How will it be different from other stuff you might be reading on the Ukraine war? And what are things like in Kyiv these days as the Ukrainians get ready for the counteroffensive for which the publication is named?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 20, 2018: This week on the Lawfare Podcast, the Guardian's Moscow correspondent Shaun Walker joined special guest host Alina Polyakova to discuss his new book "The Long Hangover: Putin's New Russia and the Ghosts of the Past." They discussed Putin's use of Russian history as political strategy, the pulse of Russian politics as its elections approach in March, the changing landscape of Russia's lesser-known cities since the 1990s, and much more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From the birth of the republic, American presidents have communicated with the public in one form or another. The frequency and exact nature of such efforts have varied quite a bit over time due to variables ranging from the extent of partisanship in the media to each commander in chief's personal preference to travel technology. Political scientist Anne Pluta has explored this history deeply, including extensive analysis of contemporary newspaper accounts back to the late 18th century. And her insights, contained in writings like the book “Persuading the Public: The Evolution of Popular Presidential Communication from Washington to Trump,” provide plenty of surprises and even challenge some conventional wisdom about the presidency.David Priess chatted with her about her favorite presidents and her assessment of the best communicators among them; the precedents set by George Washington; Thomas Jefferson's State of the Union delivery method; changes in the communication environment during the Andrew Jackson era; Abraham Lincoln's exceptional presidency; the importance of train travel for presidential contact with the public; Rutherford Hayes's underappreciated importance in presidential communication; Theodore Roosevelt as a speaker; Woodrow Wilson's decision to deliver the State of the Union address in person; the importance for presidential communication of radio, television, and the availability of Air Force One; the relatively brief period of national, "objective" media; the late 20th century shift to splintered media; Donald Trump's social media use; Joe Biden's communication practices; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The play HamiltonThe TV show John AdamsThe movie LincolnThe book Persuading the Public by Anne PlutaThe TV show The West WingThe TV show VeepThe movie The American PresidentThe movie Air Force OneThe movie Independence DayThe TV show ScandalThe book The Devil's TeethThe book Twelve Days of TerrorThe book The WaveChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 16, 2019: Since November, Lawfare Contributor Michelle Melton has run a series on our website about Climate Change and National Security, examining the implication of the threat as well as U.S. and international responses to climate change. Melton is a student a Harvard Law school. Prior to that she was an associate fellow in the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where she focused on climate policy.She and Benjamin Wittes sat down last week to discuss the series. They talked about why we should think about climate change as a national security threat, the challenges of viewing climate change through this paradigm, the long-standing relationship between climate change and the U.S. national security apparatus, and how climate change may affect global migration.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thursday was sentencing day for some senior Oath Keepers, and Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff spent the day in court listening to and watching the sentencing of Elmer Stewart Rhodes III and Kelly Meggs, two Oath Keepers chieftains who were convicted of seditious conspiracy in connection with the Jan. 6 insurrection. They got a lot of time: Rhodes got 18 years; Meggs got 12. They also got a terrorism enhancement. It was a bad day if you're an Oath Keeper and a really bad day if you're a Proud Boy. After the sentencing, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Roger to talk through it all. What does it mean for future Oath Keeper sentencing? What does it mean for Proud Boy sentencing? When are we finally going to see the white collar defendants as well as the blue collar defendants in Jan. 6 cases? And can we finally begin to predict what Jack Smith may be up to regarding Jan. 6?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At 9:02 a.m. on April 19, 1995, a bomb built by Timothy McVeigh exploded in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City. One hundred sixty-eight people died and hundreds more were injured in what remains the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history.Jeffrey Toobin has a new book about the bombing and trial called, “Homegrown: Timothy McVeigh and the Rise of Right-Wing Extremism.” Toobin joined Jack Goldsmith to discuss the new and revealing information his book draws on concerning McVeigh’s motivations and trial strategy, Attorney General Merrick Garland's consequential role in the McVeigh trial, and the long-tail impact of the trial on right-wing domestic terrorism in the United States, including the Jan. 6 attacks on Congress.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court last week issued the biggest opinion in the history of the internet—except that it didn’t. Rather, it issued an opinion in a case involving the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), finding there was no cause of action and thus dismissed for further consideration the biggest case in the history of the internet.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson,  Alan Rozenshtein, and Quinta Jurecic to talk about Section 230, Taamneh v. Twitter, and Gonzalez v. Google.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hacking and cybersecurity are evergreen issues, in the news and on Lawfare. Scott Shapiro, the Charles F. Southmayd Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy at Yale Law School, has a new book on how and why hacking works and what to do about it, called “Fancy Bear Goes Phishing: The Dark History of the Information Age, in Five Extraordinary Hacks.”Scott joined Jack Goldsmith to talk about how his pre-law-professor obsession with computers combined with his recent work in international law led him to write the book. They also discussed the lessons that the five hacks discussed in the book teach, including the limits of technology and solving cybersecurity problems, the importance of the human dimension to cybersecurity, and why we shouldn't be panicked about the state of cyber insecurity.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In November 1919, President Woodrow Wilson came out in opposition to a compromise that would have resulted in Senate ratification of the Versailles Treaty and thereby put the nail in the coffin of an international agreement that he had spent months negotiating and would have secured U.S. participation in one of his greatest legacies, the League of Nations.Wilson's self-defeating decision shocked many who had been involved in the treaty negotiation, including a young diplomat and journalist named William Bullitt. Deciphering what about Wilson's psychology led to such a monumental decision became an obsession for Bullitt, one he pursued with an unlikely partner, Sigmund Freud, the father of modern psychoanalysis. Yet the original text they authored on the subject remained unpublished for decades, as Bullitt pursued a career in diplomacy and politics, until it was finally unearthed in 2014 by scholar Patrick Weil. Weil's new book, “The Madman in the White House,” tells the unlikely story of the Bullitt-Freud analysis of President Wilson and the lies it intersected with.Weil joined Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to discuss Bullitt’s exceptional life and career, what he and Freud truly thought of one of our most complex and controversial former presidents, and what it tells us about how we should think about the role psychology plays in the modern presidency. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan and Scott were joined by co-host emeritus (and Washington Post star reporter) Shane Harris to talk over the week's news! Including:“Flight of the Valkyries.” Recently leaked U.S. intelligence reports allege that Wagner Group owner Yevgeniy Prighozin—who has privately and publicly feuded with the Russian military leadership in recent weeks and even threatened to pull his mercenary troops from the conflict—has been in contact with Ukrainian intelligence and offered to share Russian troop positions in exchange for concessions around the disputed city of Bakhmut. Is Prighozin trying to find a path to retreat? What do his actions tell us about the conflict?“Jerkiye Boy.” Twitter owner Elon Musk has come under criticism for the company’s latest bad call: censoring certain content at the request of the Erdogan government in Türkiye, just prior to national elections there. How should Twitter have responded to the demands of Turkish officials? And how has Musk’s erratic leadership affected the company’s approach to such issues?“BootLichter.” CNN and its CEO Chris Licht are experiencing blowback from the decision to host a town hall with former President Donald Trump before an audience of his supporters, at which he repeated an array of lies about the 2020 election results, the recent judgment finding him liable for sexual battery, and his potential legal exposure for retaining classified documents, among other items. Was CNN in the wrong? How should it handle Trump (and other candidates)?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 9, 2020: It was a big week for manipulated video and audio content. In just 36 hours, senior republicans or people associated with the Trump campaign tweeted, posted or shared manipulated audio or video on social media three times, prompting backlash from media and tech companies. Last week, Lawfare's managing editor, Quinta Jurecic, and associate editor, Jacob Schulz, wrote a piece analyzing these incidents. To talk through issues of deep fakes and cheap fakes, Benjamin Wittes spoke with Quinta, Jacob and Danielle Citron, a professor of law at the Boston University School of law. They talked about who posted what on Twitter and other social media, how the companies responded, what more they could have done and whether posting manipulated video is still worth it, given how companies now respond.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past two weeks, the Department of Justice has issued two press releases announcing disruption efforts it has taken against malicious cyber actors. One operation involved the disruption of Russia’s so-called Snake Malware Network, and the other involved the indictment of a Russian national for ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure. To talk about these disruption efforts, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Alex Iftimie, Partner at the law firm Morrison Foerster, and a former federal prosecutor in the National Security and Cyber Crimes Units in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. They talked about the operational details and sophistication of some aspects of these disruption operations, the significance and relationship of these operations to other disruption efforts, and how these recent efforts fit into the broader picture of the DOJ’s and the U.S. government’s efforts to disrupt malicious cyber actors. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On April 13, 2022, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes conducted his first “special military operation” at the Russian embassy in Washington, DC. It involved 14 theater stage lights that Wittes and other activists used to project images of the Ukrainian flag onto embassy walls. Since then, Wittes’s special military operations have garnered increased attention and become more complex—technically and diplomatically. In his conversation with Katherine Pompilio, one of Lawfare’s associate editors and this week’s Chatter guest host, Wittes talks about the genesis of these special military operations, what it’s like conducting international negotiations with Russian diplomats via the U.S. Secret Service, the international law of light protests, how a paper mache washing machine is involved in all of this, his career, his other projects, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:Ben’s Substack Dog Shirt DailyThe video Defect and Repent: A Laser PoemThe video "It's Almost Like the Russians Don't Negotiate in Good Faith": A Video Parable.The video U.S. Ukrainian Activists Presents Umbrella BoyThe podcast #LiveFromUkraine: Katya Savchenko Survived Bucha—and Wrote About ItThe Washington Post article “Activists train spotlight of Ukrainian flag on Russian Embassy”The video of the spotlight cat and mouse gameThe work of Robin BellChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Think about the world. You might be picturing a globe in a classroom, with its patchwork of multi-colored nations. Or perhaps you have an image of a 2-D map in your head, the famous Mercator projection, a static jigsaw puzzle of borders and countries. From elementary school classrooms to the Olympic stage, the globe and the map tell a story of how the world works, one in which state sovereignty reigns supreme, from the Treaty of Westphalia until now. But what if that’s only part of the story? As Quinn Slobodian writes, “The modern world is pockmarked, perforated, tattered and jagged, ripped up and pinpricked. Inside the containers of nations are unusual legal spaces, anomalous territories and peculiar jurisdictions..”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien spoke with Quinn, Professor of History at Wellesley College, to discuss his new book, “Crack-Up Capitalism: Market Radicals and the Dream of a World Without Democracy.” They talked about some of these sites of exception—the city-states, havens, enclaves, free ports, high-tech parks, duty-free districts, and other spaces Quinn calls zones; why states give up these slivers of sovereignty; and how the world actually works, as Quinn sees it. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The House’s select committee on Jan. 6 may have wound down its work at the end of December 2022, but questions about why law enforcement, including the U.S. Capitol Police, were unprepared for the possibility of an insurrection remain. A new report from the Project on Government Oversight sheds some light on the role that dysfunction in the department’s intelligence division played in leaving the force ill-equipped for what happened on that day.Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at Brookings and Senior Editor of Lawfare, and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with the report’s author, Nick Schwellenbach, to discuss mismanagement in the intelligence division preceding Jan. 6, its consequences, and what’s changed since.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In recent years, the Supreme Court's non-merits “shadow docket” has become a topic of contestation and controversy, especially the Court's emergency orders rulings on issues ranging from immigration to abortion to Covid-19 restrictions.To discuss these issues, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Stephen Vladeck, the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law, who is the author of a new book entitled, “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic.” They discussed the origins of the contemporary shadow docket in some 1973 emergency orders related to the bombing of Cambodia, why the Court’s shadow docket has grown in prominence in recent years, what's wrong with the shadow docket, and how to fix it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Though the threat of climate change has come sharply into focus in recent decades, humans have long endeavored to shape and reshape the natural world, carving it up and making sense of it through technological innovations. In just one example, projects of reclamation have increased Singapore’s total land area by 25 percent. The Changi airport sits on land that was once ocean. As Surabhi Ranganathan discusses in her recent article, “The Law of the Sea” for The Dial, this poses a unique challenge for international law. Surbahi writes, “The shifting relation between land and sea reflects the scale of human impact on the environment. This unstable relation forces us to confront the consequences of climate change, as the fixed certainties—soil, resources, infrastructure—that have for so long governed our imagination of land begin to fall apart.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Surabhi, a Professor of International Law at the University of Cambridge, to discuss her article and what shipwrecks, fragile ports, sinking states, continental shelves, trash islands, seasteading, undersea cables, and oceanic vents can tell us about how international law must adapt to better address our uncertain climate future. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Olivia Nuzzi gets Washington in a way many journalists don’t. As the Washington correspondent for New York magazine, she has written perceptive, piercing, and enduring portraits of Donald Trump and the bizarre characters in his orbit. Now she’s turning her reporter’s eye to history, hosting a companion podcast to HBO's “White House Plumbers,” a five-part series that imagines the Watergate scandal through the lives of two notorious Nixon operatives, E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy.  Olivia came up as a journalist writing about politics in New Jersey. She began covering Trump at The Daily Beast, where she worked with Shane Harris. They discussed her career, what fascinates her about politics, and the prospects for the 2024 presidential campaign, where Trump appears likely to be the Republican nominee. They also discussed Hollywood and Washington’s mutual fascination with each other, and why they’d both rather live in L.A. than New York. Olivia’s work at New York magazine: https://nymag.com/author/olivia-nuzzi/ The White House Plumbers podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/white-house-plumbers-podcast/id1682542231 The White House Plumbers series on HBO: https://www.hbo.com/white-house-plumbers Olivia on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Olivianuzzi?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Garrett Graff’s new book on Watergate, which serves as a history companion to the podcast and was just named a Pulitzer Prize finalist: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Watergate/Garrett-M-Graff/9781982139179  Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Ian Enright and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 7, 2021: Over its first 100 days in office, the Biden administration has faced a difficult set of policy challenges at America's southern border, ranging from new waves of individuals driven to try to cross the border by the effects of the global pandemic, to the often difficult legacy left by some of his predecessor's draconian immigration policies. As a candidate, Biden channeled Democrats' outrage with former President Trump's actions on immigration and pledged to reverse them. But now that he is in office, will Biden find more common ground with his predecessor than expected, or will he turn over a new page on America's immigration policies? Scott R. Anderson sat down with ProPublica immigration reporter Dara Lind to discuss what drives immigration to the United States, how the Biden administration has responded thus far and what it may all mean for the future of immigration policy in the United States.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this year, Brian Fishman published a fantastic paper with Brookings thinking through how technology platforms grapple with terrorism and extremism, and how any reform to Section 230 must allow those platforms space to continue doing that work. That’s the short description, but the paper is really about so much more—about how the work of content moderation actually takes place, how contemporary analyses of the harms of social media fail to address the history of how platforms addressed Islamist terror, and how we should understand “the original sin of the internet.” For this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our occasional series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down to talk with Brian about his work. Brian is the cofounder of Cinder, a software platform for the kind of trust and safety work we describe here, and he was formerly a policy director at Meta, where he led the company’s work on dangerous individuals and organizations.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The term “spyware” refers to software that's designed to infiltrate, monitor, and extract sensitive information from a user's device without their knowledge or consent. Perhaps the most infamous example of the harm that spyware can do is the 2018 killing of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi government operatives, who used spyware to track Khashoggi before luring him to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, where he was murdered. But spyware use is not just limited to repressive autocracies. It's frequently both developed and used by liberal democracies, a practice that has generated increasing concern over the past few years.To talk about spyware and its potential regulation under international law, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, a Regents Professor and the Robina Chair in Law, Public Policy, and Society at the University of Minnesota Law School, where she also directs the Human Rights Center. Most importantly for this conversation, she's also the United Nation's Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, a position she's held since 2017. As part of that role, she recently published a report on the Global Regulation of the Counter-Terrorism Spyware Technology Trade. Alan spoke with Fionnuala about her findings and what, if anything, can be done to make spyware compliant with human rights.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since 2012, Germany has accepted more refugees than any other country in Europe aside from Turkey. The German government has dispersed these asylum seekers and other immigrants throughout the country, a policy roundly celebrated by refugee activists and governments alike. But as reporter Ali Breland recently wrote in the New Republic, “[T]hese seemingly well-intentioned policies have created dangerous situations where people of color are forced to reside in regions that may be hostile to their presence, and where they face greater threats from neo-Nazis and fascists.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Ali, a reporter at Mother Jones covering internet disinformation, technology, race, and politics, to discuss his article and reporting trip to Germany. They discussed the roots of the current neo-Nazi resurgence there, the dark side of Germany’s lauded refugee resettlement program, and why the country might be a warning sign for the rest of Europe. They also discussed parallels between the far right movements in Germany and the United States. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since March 2022, El Salvador has been under a state of exception as its President Nayib Bukele seeks to crack down on the country’s powerful gangs. Bukele, who once described himself on Twitter as the “world’s coolest dictator,” has engaged in a prolonged attack on El Salvador’s democratic institutions. And the crackdown has resulted in a range of human rights abuses. At the same time, Bukele really does seem to have been successful in curbing gang violence, and his popularity is sky high. To understand the situation in El Salvador, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Manuel Meléndez-Sánchez, a PhD candidate in Political Science at Harvard University who has written about Bukele on Lawfare. They discussed why Bukele’s crackdown on the gangs seems to be working, why it might fall apart in the long term, and what Bukele’s rise means for democracy in El Salvador and around the world.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Constitution specifies only one process for making international agreements—Article II gives the president the power to make treaties provided that two-thirds of the senators present concur. The treaty process has been on a long, slow path to obsolescence, having been replaced by various forms of binding and non-binding executive agreements. To assess the causes and impact of the United States’ declining use of treaties, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Jeffrey Peake, a political scientist at Clemson University, who is the author of the book, “Dysfunctional Diplomacy: The Politics of International Agreements in an Era of Partisan Polarization.” They discussed how domestic politics explains the decline of the treaty power, the adverse impact this decline has on U.S. foreign relations, and why executive agreements of various sorts are not full substitutes for treaties on the international stage. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, a Quinta-less Alan and Scott were joined by Lawfare legal fellow Saraphin Dhanani to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Seoul Authority.” South Korea and the United States recommitted themselves to their close security relationship this past week, including through a state dinner and a new Washington Declaration that confirms that the United States will respond to any nuclear attack on South Korea with overwhelming force. What drove this public showing? And what impact will it have on the nuclear threat posed by North Korea?“The Uncanny X-Date.” The debate over raising the debt ceiling took on new urgency this week, when Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced that the United States might meet the ‘X-Date’ at which it defaults on its obligations as soon as June 1. Yet there are few signs of a compromise, as House Republicans have dug in on a proposal that demands deep spending cuts while the Biden administration continues to push for a clean raise. Where will this debate lead?“Washington Contentious.” National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan gave remarks at our own Brookings Institution this past week, laying out a new approach to international economic policy. What should we make of this new ‘Washington Consensus’?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 7, 2020: David Priess is a former CIA briefer for the Attorney General and the FBI director, and he's the author of "The President's Book of Secrets: The Untold Story of Intelligence Briefings to America's Presidents." The president's daily brief has been in the news of late because of the Russia bounties story and the question of whether President Trump is actually internalizing the intelligence he is given in his daily briefing. Benjamin Wittes spoke with David about the history of the president's daily brief, how different presidents have gotten intelligence information and whether President Trump's behavior in this regard is exceptional or not.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yesterday was verdict day for the Proud Boys. Mid-morning, the jury notified Judge Tim Kelly that it had reached a partial verdict, and that partial verdict was “guilty of seditious conspiracy” for four of the five defendants. It was a big day for the Justice Department. To go over everything that happened, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down for a live recording of the podcast with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, who live-tweeted 61 days of the Proud Boys trial.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Private equity firms rank among the largest employers in the United States and invest many billions of dollars in a wide variety of industries. Yet the public understanding of how private equity works and its impact on myriad areas of American life, including national security, remains limited.Brendan Ballou is trying to change that. A federal prosecutor who works in the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, he has written a new book, Plunder: Private Equity's Plan To Pillage America. David Priess spoke at length with him about his previous work in the Justice Department's National Security Division, his current role working antitrust issues, the origins of his interest in private equity, the business model of private equity, its effect on industries from mortgages to nursing homes, private equity's link to the SolarWinds hack, foreign involvement in private equity, the impact of private equity on U.S. competitiveness, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Other People's Money and How the Bankers Use It by Louis BrandeisThe book Plunder: Private Equity's Plan To Pillage America by Brendan BallouThe movie This Is Spinal TapThe book Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free by Jed RakoffThe movie AlienChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At the core of the regulatory state is the notice and comment process. Agencies propose what they're going to do, the public gets to comment, and agencies have to respond to those comments. It's an imperfect system, to be sure, but it's fundamental to making sure that agencies act with good information and with democratic legitimacy.So what happens when those comments start being made not by people, but by ChatGPT or other large language models? Or how about when agencies themselves use these AI tools to analyze the comments they receive, or even perhaps to write the regulations themselves?To talk through these issues, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bridget Dooling and Mark Febrizio, both of the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center. They spoke about their recent Brooking Institution report on the issue and how they think the regulatory state should deal with generative AI.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Risks associated with the rapid development and deployment of artificial intelligence are getting the attention of lawmakers. But one issue that may not be getting adequate attention by policymakers or by the AI research and cybersecurity communities is the vulnerability of many AI-based systems to adversarial attack. A new Stanford and Georgetown report, “Adversarial Machine Learning and Cybersecurity: Risks, Challenges, and Legal Implications,” offers a stark a reminder that security risks for AI-based systems are real and recommends actions that developers and policymakers can take to address the issues. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with two of the report’s authors, Jim Dempsey, Senior Policy Advisor for the Program on Geopolitics, Technology, and Governance at the Stanford Cyber Policy Center, and Jonathan Spring, Cybersecurity Specialist at the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). They talked about how AI-based systems are vulnerable to attack, the similarities and differences between vulnerabilities in AI-based systems and traditional software vulnerabilities, and how some of the challenges and problems with AI security may be social as much as they are technological.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Generative AI products have been tearing up the headlines recently. Among the many issues these products raise is whether or not their outputs are protected by Section 230, the foundational statute that shields websites from liability for third-party content.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, Lawfare’s occasional series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic and Matt Perault, Director of the Center on Technology and Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill, talked through this question with Senator Ron Wyden and Chris Cox, formerly a U.S. congressman and SEC chairman. Cox and Wyden drafted Section 230 together in 1996—and they’re skeptical that its protections apply to generative AI. Disclosure: Matt consults on tech policy issues, including with platforms that work on generative artificial intelligence products and have interests in the issues discussed.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

David Cohen is the Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, a position he held also during the Obama administration. He's also been Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence in the Department of the Treasury and a partner at the WilmerHale law firm.David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with David to talk about his career, including taking the same job twice; the coming debate about the FISA Amendments Act reauthorization; relationships between CIA and other U.S. government elements, particularly in cyber; the new CIA Transnational and Technology Mission Center; and the strategic competition between the United States and the People's Republic of China.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As satellites around the planet proliferate, the tug they feel from international tensions seems to rival the gravitational pull exerted by the Earth itself. On issues from Space Traffic Management to scientific data sharing, the need for global cooperation is high but rarely easy.Dr. Mariel Borowitz is head of the Program on International Affairs, Science, and Technology at Georgia Tech's Sam Nunn School of International Affairs, where she is an Associate Professor, and author of “Open Space: The Global Effort for Open Access to Environmental Satellite Data,” which dives deeply into the history of government agencies' and international organizations' tough choices about when and how to share scientific information collected by various orbiting platforms.David Priess chatted with her about space diplomacy as a domain; auroras and satellites; the Artemis crew; the Space Force; the James Webb Space Telescope; working at NASA headquarters; the changing nature of satellite constellations; Starlink; Space Situational Awareness and Space Traffic Management; countries' choices about making data from satellites freely available; the evolution of LANDSAT; the history of satellite data sharing by entities in the United States, Europe, Russia, China, Japan, and India; the inhibiting effects of Russia's war in Ukraine; commercialization of satellite systems; how to grow space diplomats; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The movie 2001The movie 2010The movie The MartianThe TV show The ExpanseThe movie ArrivalQueen guitarist Brian May's work on the New Horizons missionThe Chatter podcast episode Satellites, Space Debris, and Hollywood with Aaron BatemanThe movie GravityChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 13, 2020: Scott R. Anderson sat down with Elizabeth Shackelford, a former foreign service officer whose late 2017 resignation became a sign of growing discontent with the Trump administration within the diplomatic corps. They talked about her new book, "The Dissent Channel," out this week, which discusses her experience as a young diplomat living through a period of crisis in South Sudan, and the lessons it taught her about diplomacy, human rights and the role of the United States in the world.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2018, news broke that Facebook had allowed third-party developers—including the controversial data analytics firm Cambridge Analytica—to obtain large quantities of user data in ways that users probably didn’t anticipate. The fallout led to a controversy over whether Cambridge Analytica had in some way swung the 2016 election for Trump (spoiler: it almost certainly didn’t), but it also generated a $5 billion fine imposed on Facebook by the FTC for violating users’ privacy. Along with that record-breaking fine, the FTC also imposed a number of requirements on Facebook to improve its approach to privacy. It’s been four years since that settlement, and Facebook is now Meta. So how much has really changed within the company? For this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the online information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic interviewed Meta’s co-chief privacy officers, Erin Egan and Michel Protti, about the company’s approach to privacy and its response to the FTC’s settlement order.At one point in the conversation, Quinta mentions a class action settlement over the Cambridge Analytica scandal. You can read more about the settlement here. Information about Facebook’s legal arguments regarding user privacy interests is available here and here, and you can find more details in the judge’s ruling denying Facebook’s motion to dismiss.Note: Meta provides support for Lawfare’s Digital Social Contract paper series. This podcast episode is not part of that series, and Meta does not have any editorial role in Lawfare.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Proud Boys trial has gone to the jury. It is the longest Jan. 6 case to date and the third case to involve seditious conspiracy charges against senior Proud Boys and folks who ended up being the pointy end of the spear on Jan. 6, 2021. Two reporters have sat through the entire case: Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, and Brandi Buchman, who covered the case for the emptywheel site. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with them to go over the trial, what case the government presented against Enrique Tarrio and his colleagues, the defenses, the holes in the case, and what we can reasonably expect from the jury.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

If someone lies about you, you can usually sue them for defamation. But what if that someone is ChatGPT? Already in Australia, the mayor of a town outside Melbourne has threatened to sue OpenAI because ChatGPT falsely named him a guilty party in a bribery scandal. Could that happen in America? Does our libel law allow that? What does it even mean for a large language model to act with "malice"? Does the First Amendment put any limits on the ability to hold these models, and the companies that make them, accountable for false statements they make? And what's the best way to deal with this problem: private lawsuits or government regulation?On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, discussed these questions with First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law at UCLA and the author of a draft paper entitled "Large Libel Models.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

April is Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention month. It’s a time—recognized by civilian and U.S. military communities—intended to promote the prevention of sexual violence, especially in U.S. armed forces. In light of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention month, Lawfare Associate Editor Katherine Pompilio sat down with author and attorney Ashley Merryman, who previously served at the Pentagon as Special Advisor for the Department of the Navy’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office. They discussed the prevalence of sexual assault and harassment at U.S. military academies, the dangerous shortcomings of the Pentagon's “lowest level” policy to address sexual harassment, how the policy came to be and why it persists, and policy recommendations for the future.Listener discretion is advised. This episode contains discussion of sexual harassment and assault.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Evan Gershkovich has been in Russian detention for the last several weeks. He is a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, and he’s the latest American taken hostage by the Vladimir Putin regime. His good friend Polina Ivanova is a reporter for the Financial Times, a colleague of Evan’s in Russia, and has been an outspoken advocate for his release. She joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes from Berlin to talk about Evan: who he is, why he has been detained by the Russians, what we know about his conditions in prison, and what it will take to get him home. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by law professor extraordinaire Jed Shugerman to talk over his controversial take on the New York district attorney's case against former President Trump, among other items in the week's national security news, including:“If You Come at the King, You Best Not Whiff.” Former President Trump’s indictment on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree under New York state law earlier this month has triggered a firestorm of controversy, with several commentators accusing New York district attorney Alvin Bragg of advancing a weak or flawed case. What should we make of Bragg’s case based on what we know so far? And what more information should we be looking for?“Factual Malice.” Fox News has settled the defamation lawsuit being pursued against it by Dominion Voting Systems for a record $787.5 million—but without having to make an on-air acknowledgement of its false statements. Does this settlement deal do justice? Should Dominion have proceeded differently?“Secret Chinese Agents, Huh?” Federal prosecutors have arrested two individuals in Brooklyn for operating a “secret police station” on behalf of the People’s Republic of China’s internal security forces, aimed at investigating and intimidating dissidents and other disfavored individuals. How should the United States and other governments approach these China-backed presences? Is criminal prosecution the right tool?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 20, 2021: Jack Goldsmith sat down with Lee Bollinger, the president of Columbia University, and Geoffrey Stone, the Edward H. Levy Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Law School, to discuss their new book, "National Security, Leaks and Freedom of the Press: The Pentagon Papers Fifty Years On." They discussed the holding and legacy of the Pentagon Papers case, as well as some of the many challenges of applying the Pentagon Papers regime in the modern digital era that is characterized by massive leaks and a very different press landscape than the one that prevailed in 1971.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past decade, North Korea has taken on an exceptional global role: a sovereign state believed to be at the head of an unprecedented international criminal network—one that is particularly active in cyberspace, where the North Korea-backed Lazarus Group is believed to have been responsible for several of the largest and most audacious incidents of hacking, ransomware, and outright theft of the modern era. Journalists Jean Lee and Geoff White have been documenting the Lazarus Group’s activities for the BBC. The second season of their podcast, “The Lazarus Heist,” is now available. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with them to discuss how this second season builds on the first, what the Lazarus Group has been up to, and what it all tells us about North Korea’s international position. They also gave us permission to share a preview for you, which plays after the discussion.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the last few months we've seen an explosion of new AI products, especially those built around large language models. And in response, we've also heard calls for far more aggressive government regulation. But what does it mean to regulate AI?Margot Kaminski is an Associate Professor of Law at University of Colorado Law School. She's just published a paper for Laware's ongoing Digital Social Contract research paper series, in which she argues that the emerging law of artificial intelligence is converging around risk regulation. Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Margot about what risk regulation means in the AI context and why she thinks that it has some serious drawbacks.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Early this month, the Republican supermajority in the Tennessee House of Representatives voted to expel two Democratic lawmakers who had participated in a protest against gun violence on the House floor. The GOP also narrowly failed to expel a third Democrat. The two legislators who were expelled, Reps. Justin Pearson and Justin Jones, have now returned to the House. But the incident turned national attention on Tennessee’s struggling democracy. To discuss, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Samar Ali, Research Professor of Political Science and Law at Vanderbilt University and Co-Chair of Vanderbilt’s Project on Unity & American Democracy, and Sekou Franklin, Professor of Political Science at Middle Tennessee State University, and the author—with Ray Block—of the book “Losing Power: African Americans and Racial Polarization in Tennessee Politics.” They explained how the expulsions should be understood as part of a larger process of democratic backsliding and misgovernment in Tennessee, and how that backsliding is itself part of a larger trend of democratic erosion at the subnational as well as the national level. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chris Fonzone is the General Counsel of ODNI and has worked in senior legal roles at the Defense Department, the National Security Council, and the Department of Justice, and in the private sector as a partner at the Sidley Austin law firm. Laura Galante is the Intelligence Community's Cyber Executive and Director of ODNI’s Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center (CTIIC). She worked previously in a position that involves supporting Ukrainian government agencies on cyber defense in the Defense Intelligence Agency and in the private sector at Mandiant.David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Chris and Laura to talk about their careers, the intra- and interagency issues in cyber policy and operations, the new National Cyber Strategy, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Republic of Vanuatu, a small island nation in the South Pacific, just won a big victory in New York City. At the end of March, the UN General Assembly voted to adopt the request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of states with respect to climate change.To talk through what Vanuatu's general counsel called, “a diplomatic feat of Herculean proportions,” Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Melissa Stewart, Assistant Professor of Law Designate at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa, and the author of a recent Lawfare article on the advisory opinion request and its potential risks and rewards. They discussed how an idea that began in an environmental law class in Fiji made it to the highest court in the world, what the ICJ might clarify or not, other efforts in international law to address climate change, and how territorial loss and other destructive effects from climate change could upend our traditional conception of statehood as we know it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nancy Youssef has reported on war and conflict around the world and from Washington. As a young journalist, she went to Iraq and sensed early on that a war most presumed would be over quickly was only just beginning. Her career has taken her to Afghanistan, Egypt, and into the center of power at the Pentagon. Nancy is now a national security correspondent for The Wall Street Journal. In her conversation with Shane Harris, Nancy talks about her Journal colleague, Evan Gershkovich, who was arrested last month in Russia and accused of spying, charges that his family, his employer, and the U.S. government vociferously deny. Like Nancy, Evan is the child of immigrants. She says she admired his reporting for giving voice to the Russian people at a time of war. Nancy has seen other colleagues taken prisoner amid conflict and shared her thoughts about the risks that journalists face both in war zones and from states that see information as a weapon.  Shane and Nancy are old friends and worked together at The Daily Beast, where they covered U.S. national security and foreign policy. Nancy’s work at The Wall Street Journal:  https://www.wsj.com/news/author/nancy-a-youssef Nancy on Twitter: https://twitter.com/nancyayoussef  A recent profile on Evan Gershkovich from The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/04/08/evan-gershkovich-russia-wsj-journalist-arrested-profile/ More on Austin Tice, a friend of Nancy’s who went missing in Syria: https://www.austinticefamily.com/ Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 17, 2019: Tensions in the Middle East are at a high point. Over the weekend, large Saudi oil facilities were attacked. The Yemeni Houthis jumped in to claim responsibility. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Iran. President Trump tweets that the U.S. is 'locked and loaded' and ready for potential response. But what has actually happened in the Arabian Peninsula? What does the future hold for conflict between the Saudis and the Iranians? And what role will the United States have?To talk it all through, Benjamin Wittes spoke with Gregory Johnsen, a researcher on Yemen and Middle East conflict; Suzanne Maloney, a Brookings senior fellow whose research centers on Iran; Samantha Gross, a fellow in the Cross-Brookings Initiative on Energy and Climate; and Scott R. Anderson, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and senior editor at Lawfare. They talked about what we know about what happened over the weekend, the geopolitical context for the attack, potential American responses, and the legal authorities that could justify American military action.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past few years, TikTok has become a uniquely polarizing social media platform. On the one hand, millions of users, especially those in their teens and twenties, love the app. On the other hand, the government is concerned that TikTok's vulnerability to pressure from the Chinese Communist Party makes it a serious national security threat. There's even talk of banning the app altogether. But would that be legal? In particular, does the First Amendment allow the government to ban an application that’s used by millions to communicate every day?On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Matt Perault, director of the Center on Technology Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Alan Z. Rozenshtein, Lawfare Senior Editor and Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota, spoke with Ramya Krishnan, a staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, and Mary-Rose Papendrea, the Samuel Ashe Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law, to think through the legal and policy implications of a TikTok ban.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A few weeks ago, China made headlines for brokering a deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to thaw diplomatic relations after seven years of cutting ties and even more years of tense relations. Since then, we've already begun to see some downstream effects of this deal with significant movement on the war in Yemen and the reopening of Iran's embassy in Saudi Arabia.This is a story with two major strands—one about the potential effects of a successful normalization between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and another about how China, and not the U.S., seems to have made it happen. To understand what all of this might mean for the region, Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han talked to Lawfare Senior Editor Scott Anderson and CNAS Middle East Security Program Director Jonathan Lord about the contours of the deal, China's involvement in the process, and what to look out for as this deal ripens.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thomas Rid is a Professor of Strategic Studies at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. Aric Toler is the Director of Research and Training at Bellingcat. Both have been writing about the latest megaleak out of the U.S. national security establishment, a story that the New York Times reported on last week and that gets weirder and weirder every day that passes. Rid has been tweeting about the subject, and Toler is the author of a major investigation for Bellingcat on it.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with them to talk about the strange details of the leak: the Discord servers, the Minecraft servers, the weird group of gamers who are by their own account a bit racist, the huge damage to both U.S. and Ukrainian national security interests, and that the leak appears to be a big win for Russia, even though Russia doesn't appear to be behind it. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Document leaking has been in the news lately—and not just stories about the leaking of U.S. intelligence documents. On March 30, 2023, the Washington Post published a series of stories about the Vulkan files, an international investigative project based on thousands of pages of leaked documents from a Russian company that reveal new details about how Russian intelligence agencies seek to operate disinformation campaigns and enhance their ability to launch cyberattacks with the help of contractors. To talk about the Vulkan files, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Craig Timberg, Senior Editor for Collaborative Investigations at the Washington Post, who, along with his colleague Ellen Nakashima, has bylines on these stories. They talked about how the Washington Post got involved in this investigation, what the documents revealed about Russian cyber conflict, and what Craig considered to be some of the biggest takeaways from the documents.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On March 23, 2023, an Indian court found Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s principal opposition leader, Rahul Gandhi, guilty of defaming the Prime Minister and the Modi surname. He was sentenced to two years in prison and expelled from Parliament in what journalists and pro-democracy groups view as yet another inflection point of democratic decline under Modi’s leadership. To understand the challenges facing Indian society and the current deterioration of India’s democracy, Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Debasish Roy Chowdhury an Indian journalist based in Hong Kong and Calcutta, who has written extensively on Indian politics, society, and geopolitics. He co-authored a book titled “To Kill a Democracy: India’s Passage to Despotism,” which paints a chilling history and reality of the state of Indian democracy. They discussed the Rahul Gandhi case, the spillover of Hindu nationalism into mainstream politics under Modi’s leadership, and the future of India’s democracy. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to celebrate the return of the complete media madhouse and talk through the week’s big stories, including:I’m So Indicted and I Just Can’t Fight It.” Donald Trump became the first former president to be indicted this past week—and he celebrated with a speech from his Mar-a-Lago estate that painted the charges against him as a partisan witch-hunt. How big a step is this? And where is it likely to lead?“(Re)Press Pass.” Russia has jailed Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and is preparing to prosecute him on espionage charges. What appears to be driving Russia’s decision? And how should the rest of the world respond?“Crossing the Finnish Line.” Finland became NATO’s newest member this week, doubling the alliance’s shared border with Russia. What does an expanding NATO mean for security in Europe?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From August 2, 2014: This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes asked three of his colleagues—all from the Brookings Center on Middle East Policy—to chat about Gaza: Natan Sachs is a specialist in Israeli politics; Khaled Elgindy has served as an advisor to the Palestinian leadership on final status negotiations; and Tamara Cofman Wittes directs the center and served as deputy assistant secretary of state during the Arab Spring. (She is also, by the way, married to someone somehow connected to this site.) It's a great discussion: informative, not shrill, depressing, yet constructive.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Rob Joyce is the Director of the Cybersecurity Directorate at the National Security Agency. He's been NSA's top cryptologic representative in the United Kingdom and has also worked in the U.S. National Security Council. David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Rob to talk about his career trajectory, the quantum decryption threat, strategic competition in cyber with the People's Republic of China, and cooperation between the private sector and the government in cyberspace.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Finland is in NATO. This week, the ratification was made complete, and the country joined the North Atlantic alliance. To talk through how it got there, Lawfare Publisher David Priess sat down with two research fellows at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs in Helsinki: Henri Vanhanen, who has also served as a foreign policy advisor to the National Coalition Party, which recently won the most seats in the Finnish parliament and is in the process of forming a government, and Minna Ålander, a research fellow who, like Henri, has recently written for Lawfare and has been on the podcast previously to talk about Finnish security issues. They talked about the long road to get to NATO membership for Finland, what Finland brings to NATO, and what NATO brings to Finland.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The grand jury indictment of Donald Trump in the Supreme Court of the State of New York has been unsealed. It involves Stormy Daniels, Karen McDougal, David Pecker, the famous doorman, Trump Tower, and a lot of salacious stuff—and 34 counts of falsified business records with intent to facilitate other crimes.On this emergency edition of the Lawfare Podcast, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down to unpack it all with Rebecca Roiphe of the New York Law School, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic, Lawfare's Fulton County correspondent Anna Bower, and Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has tested the international legal order like never before. For many, the fact that a nuclear power and member of the U.N. Security Council would commit unveiled aggression against another state seemed like it might be the death knell of the international system as we know it. But last week, in the annual Breyer Lecture on International Law at the Brookings Institution, Oona Hathaway, the Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Professor of International Law at Yale Law School, argued that international law and institutions responded more robustly than many initially anticipated—and may yet emerge from the Ukraine conflict stronger than before.In this episode, we are bringing you the audio of Professor Hathaway’s lecture, followed by a question and answer session with Constanze Stelzenmüller, the Director of the Center on the United States and Europe and the inaugural holder of the Fritz Stern Chair on Germany and trans-Atlantic Relations at the Brookings Institution. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson then moderated a panel discussion that included Professor Hathaway, as well as Professor Rosa Brooks of Georgetown University Law Center; Karin Landgren, the Executive Director of Security Council Report; and Ambassador Martin Kimani, Kenya’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations. More information on the Breyer Lecture is available on the Brookings Institution’s website.A video recording of Professor Hathaway’s lecture is available at https://www.brookings.edu/events/russias-aggression-against-ukraine-and-the-international-legal-order/.The text of Professor Hathaway’s lecture has been published at https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/how-russias-invasion-of-ukraine-tested-the-international-legal-order/.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Cyber Initiative and Aspen Digital, Verify 2023 brings together journalists and cyber and tech policy experts to discuss critical issues in cybersecurity. For this live recording of the Lawfare Podcast, Benjamin Wittes sat down at Verify 2023 with Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory; Nicole Perlroth, formerly of the New York Times and the author of a recent book on zero days; and Dave Willner, the Head of Trust & Safety at OpenAI, the company that produces ChatGPT. They talked about cybersecurity and AI, the threats to AI algorithms, the threats from AI algorithms, and the threats from humans misusing large language models. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Misperceptions about nuclear proliferation attempts abound, particularly when we find authoritarian leaders involved. It is easy to picture these determined owners of nuclear weapons as omnipotent, unconstrained micromanagers—willing and able to do whatever is necessary to take their country over the threshold.Political scientist Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer disagrees. She conducted extensive research in IAEA and other archives as well as in-depth interviews with senior scientists and regime officials from Iraq and Libya, including Muammar Gaddafi's son Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi. What she discovered led her to question much conventional wisdom about the Iraqi and Libyan nuclear programs, and about proliferation writ large. Her book “Unclear Physics”—which borrows its title from a typo in an Iraqi report from the late 1960s that characterized well the vague objectives of the early Iraqi nuclear program—presents intriguing information and insight on all of this.David Priess speaks with Braut-Hegghammer about her interest in WMD proliferation, how she researched secretive nuclear programs, the value of archives, Iraq's quest for the bomb, the impact of Israel's strike on the Osirak reactor in 1981, how close Iraq was to breaking out when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, the origins of Libya's nuclear program, Gaddafi's turn to the A.Q. Khan network for the equipment and blueprints needed, implications for the potential proliferation paths of countries from North Korea and Iran to Saudi Arabia and South Korea, the rising salience of nuclear weapons in Arctic security debates, and Norwegian views on nuclear deterrence in today's evolving strategic environment.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 8, 2019: The Russian government's recent arrest of American Paul Whelan and its charges against him have many politicians and pundits speculating about the possibility of an intended spy swap for Maria Butina. There's a lot going on here, but there's also a lot of misunderstanding about the history of spy swaps, what they are, and what they aren't.Earlier this week, David Priess sat down with his former CIA colleague John Sipher to talk about it all. They discussed the history of spy swaps, the current case involving Paul Whelan, and prospects for some kind of a release.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On March 27, the Biden administration issued an Executive Order on Prohibition on Use by the United States Government of Commercial Spyware that Poses Risks to National Security. The Executive Order, as the title says, limits executive departments and agencies from using commercial spyware if they determine that its use would present a counterintelligence or security risk to the U.S., or if it poses significant risks of improper use by a foreign government or person. To talk about the new executive order and its impact, Eugenia Lostri, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, sat down with Winnona DeSombre Bernsen, nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council. They talked about why this executive order is a welcomed development, how spyware companies might adjust their behavior in response, and what remains to be done to limit the misuse of these technologies.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For months, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been promising a set of legal reforms favored by partners in his far-right coalition government that many fear would spell the end of liberal democracy in the state of Israel. But this week, these efforts hit a roadblock in the form of an unprecedented degree of popular resistance—one that ultimately led Netanyahu to put his reform proposals on hold, at least for the moment.On Wednesday, Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Natan Sachs convened a panel of experts to discuss these fast-moving developments, including his Brookings colleagues Amos Harel, a leading Israeli military and defense expert, and Shibley Telhami, the Anwar Sadat Professor of Peace and Development at the University of Maryland, and leading Israeli journalist and legal expert Ilana Dayan. To give you some additional background, Lawfare Senior Editor and Brookings Fellow Scott R. Anderson sat down with Natan separately to lay out recent developments and their significance. That conversation will come first, and the panel discussion will follow.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tatyana Bolton is a Security Policy Manager working on cybersecurity at Google, and Dave Kleidermacher is the Vice President of Android Security & Privacy at Google. They are among the people at Google who are thinking about IoT, that is, Internet of Things security and privacy. They sat down with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about Google's thinking on how to create a secure environment for all those little things that we have traveling with us, connected to our computers, running our houses, all connected to the internet, and all using different standards of security. How do we prevent them from being hijacked and turned into botnets? How do we prevent them from spying on us? How do we get them observing similar standards of security, and how do we do this across dozens of different countries, jurisdictions and regulatory environments, and platforms?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

States are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence systems to enhance their national security decision-making. The real risks that states will deploy unlawful or unreliable national security AI make international regulations seem appealing, but what's the right model for them?Ashley Deeks is the Class of 1948 Professor of Scholarly Research in Law at the University of Virginia Law School. She's just published a paper for Laware's ongoing Digital Social Contract research paper series, in which she argues that, instead of looking to nuclear arms control as the model for national security AI regulation, states should look to how cyber operations are regulated. Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Ashley about her research and what a successful regulatory regime for national security AI would look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On the latest episode of Arbiters of Truth, Lawfare's series on the information ecosystem, Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Ravi Iyer, the Managing Director of the Psychology of Technology Institute at the University of Southern California's Neely Center.Earlier in his career, Ravi held a number of positions at Meta, where he worked to make Facebook's algorithm provide actual value, not just "engagement," to users. Quinta and Alan spoke with Ravi about why he thinks that content moderation is a dead-end and why thinking about the design of technology is the way forward to make sure that technology serves us and not the other way around.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott waited for a big shoe to drop by talking over the week's big national security news, including:“What Else Can I Get Away With on Fifth Avenue...” Donald Trump is expected to become the first former president to be indicted on criminal charges this week—if, that is, local authorities are not deterred by the public protests Trump’s supporters are preparing to hold in New York City at his request. What will this move mean for the country? And how might it end? “Territorial Refute.” After weeks of avoiding the issue, likely 2024 Republican presidential contender Ron Desantis adopted the position that supporting Ukraine—which he described as being involved in a “territorial dispute”—is not a vital U.S. interest, bringing him into alignment with former President Trump and signaling a strong lean towards isolationism in the 2024 Republican field. What will this mean for the likely candidates? And for U.S. support for Ukraine moving forward?“The ‘Blood, Treasure, and Regret’ Anniversary.” This past week marked the 20th anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, which set out to remove a dictator and welcome a new wave of democracy in the Middle East—but has instead resulted in an Iraq that is still recovering from years of sectarian violence and increasingly under Iran’s influence. What is the legacy of the decision to invade? And what does it mean for U.S. foreign policy moving forward?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 28, 2021: The Biden administration has now responded to two major cyberattacks—one from Russia, the SolarWinds attack, and the other from China, the so-called Hafnium Microsoft Exchange Server attack. Recently, Lawfare has run articles on both of these incidents—a piece from Dmitri Alperovitch, the co-founder and former CTO of CrowdStrike, and a piece from Alex Iftimie, a former Justice Department official and a lawyer at Morrison & Foerster. They joined Benjamin Wittes to discuss the Biden administration's response to the attacks. Were they appropriate, both in absolute terms and in relation to each other? Do they send the right messages to the countries in question? Do they go far enough? And what more do we want to see?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, the Government Accountability Office released its latest report on the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, focusing on the failures of several government agencies to fully process and share information about a potential attack in the days and weeks leading up to January 6, 2021.Lawfare Senior Editor and Brookings Senior Fellow Molly Reynolds sat down with NBC News Justice Reporter Ryan Reilly, who's reported broadly on law enforcement issues related to Jan. 6, and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic. They discussed what we know about how and why law enforcement struggled in the lead-up to the insurrection and the challenges for the road ahead.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The open nature of the internet has allowed malicious actors to abuse technology. Information operations, offensive cyber, and IP theft are just some examples of this misuse. The Biden administration has pursued an industrial policy that hopes to counter the weaponization of globalized systems. This approach includes technology subsidies, export controls, and rethinking supply chains. But this approach could undermine efforts to advance global rules and values.To discuss how the United States can push back while bolstering democracy and human rights, Eugenia Lostri, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, sat down with former Ambassador Karen Kornbluh, Managing Director of the Digital Innovation and Democracy Initiative and Senior Fellow with the German Marshall Fund. Ambassador Kornbluh is the lead author on the new GMF report “The New American Foreign Policy of Technology.” They discussed why there’s a need to rethink American foreign policy, how to center democratic values, and the crucial role of a multistakeholder approach.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On December 31, 2023, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) will expire unless it is reauthorized by Congress. Section 702 authorizes the U.S. government, in order to obtain foreign intelligence information, to target foreigners who are reasonably believed to be outside of the U.S. and collect their communications inside the U.S. without a warrant—even when such surveillance may involve the incidental collection of communications of U.S. persons. Privacy and civil liberties advocates have long raised concerns about the government's ability to conduct so-called backdoor searches of U.S. person information acquired incidentally through the collection of the communications of foreigners. U.S.government officials have argued that it is imperative for Congress to reauthorize Section 702. To talk about Section 702 and its reauthorization, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Travis LeBlanc, a Member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board and a partner at Cooley LLP. They discussed his concerns with the way the government may search or use U.S. person information incidentally collected under Section 702, the aspects of the government's position on reauthorization on which he may agree, and how he believes Congress should reform Section 702. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By many accounts, the United States is living through a new era of competition—not just between major powers and strategic rivals, but between ideologies. Around the world, many authoritarian governments seem to be on the rise, even as many liberal democracies are facing a crisis of confidence, including, by some accounts, here in the United States.In a new book entitled, “Defeating the Dictators,” Charles Dunst, a former journalist and current deputy director of research and analytics at The Asia Group, lays out what he sees as the right strategy for making democracies more effective and defeating the appeal of authoritarian government. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with him to discuss his new book, the importance he places on Singapore as a case study, and how the domestic remedies he focuses on translate into foreign policy.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Twenty years ago today, the United States invaded the nation of Iraq, intent on removing the regime of dictator Saddam Hussein and installing a stable democratic government. What followed instead was two decades of political instability and horrible sectarian violence that has yielded a modern Iraqi state that remains plagued with corruption and other problems, and is increasingly under immense pressure from the nearby regime in Iran.To gain perspective on the legacy of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and how it continues to shape the relationship between the two countries today, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down for conversations with two individuals whose personal and professional lives have been intimately tied up in the last two decades of the U.S.-Iraq relationship. First, Scott sat down with Ambassador Doug Silliman, who is now the president of the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington, and who previously served in numerous capacities in Iraq, including as ambassador, over his decades-long career as a U.S. diplomat. Scott then sat down with Salem Chalabi, an individual who has held numerous positions across several administrations in the Iraqi government over the past two decades, most recently serving as the head of the Trade Bank of Iraq until January of this year. In each conversation, they discuss the legacy of the U.S. invasion, how it impacts the bilateral relationship today, and the central role Iran has come to play in the country.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Academy loves a good spy flick, and so do we! This week, Shane Harris talks with Washington Post culture critic Alyssa Rosenberg about the enduring power of espionage on the big screen. Movies like Zero Dark Thirty, the Mission: Impossible franchise, and this year’s Top Gun: Maverick and All Quiet on the Western Front, which both took home Oscars, help us understand global conflict as they wrestle with questions of personal morality. How do the stories of James Bond and George Smiley help us make sense of the fate of nations? And why is Hollywood finding it nearly impossible to tell stories about great power competition between the U.S. and China? Shane and Alyssa go way back, and this is a fun, lively conversation about spy stories that have resonated through the decades. Alyssa has written for years about popular culture, books, and more recently parenting. Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 24, 2020: What do Russia, China and Canada all have in common? They all disagree—in one manner or another—with American policy goals in the Arctic, where climate change is driving opportunities and challenges for U.S. policy-makers. In this episode, National Security Institute Visiting Fellow and former senior intelligence official Jim Danoy discusses his paper, “The Arctic: Securing the High Ground,” with host Lester Munson. They discuss the fascinating policy dilemmas posed by the unique geography of the North Pole and how the United States can exploit new opportunities to maximum benefit.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Artificial Intelligence is advancing at what seems like an exponential rate, with every month—sometimes every week—bringing news of a new, game-changing discovery. But just as the progress in AI is accelerating, so is the pessimism about it, with many scholars, commentators, and technologists themselves raising the alarm about AI's potential harms to equality, privacy, and security.Challenging this consensus is Orly Lobel, a law professor at the University of San Diego and the author of the new book, "The Equality Machine: Harnessing Digital Technology for a Brighter, More Inclusive Future." Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein sat down with Orly to discuss her book, why she's optimistic about AI's potential to advance equality, and what the government can do to help.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As U.S. counterterrorism efforts have waned in Yemen, Libya, and parts of Pakistan, Somalia has emerged as the most active element in the “forever wars” that the U.S. has waged since 9/11, according to Eric Schmitt of the New York Times. Schmitt traveled to Somalia in February for a rare embed with U.S. Special Operations forces on the ground in the midst of a recent offensive launched by the Somali government against a formidable enemy, Al Shabab.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Eric and his Times colleague Charlie Savage to discuss the conflict in the Horn of Africa and the extent of U.S. military involvement there. They discussed the roots of the Shabab insurgency, whether or not the current moment marks an inflection point in the fight, the legal grounds on which the U.S. government justifies its campaign, and why the American public and government alike should pay more attention to Somalia.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As Director of the United States Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Jen Easterly is one of several women at the very top of the cybersecurity pyramid in the United States. A graduate of West Point, decorated U.S. Army officer, and a Rhodes Scholar, Jen has served her country in a plethora of senior cybersecurity and counterterrorism roles, and most recently before her return to government, was the head of Firm Resilience at Morgan Stanley. David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Jen to talk about everything cybersecurity, about the need for revolutionary new approaches to emerging threats to our cyber and national security, the recent U.S. National Cyber Strategy, the cyber offense/defense flywheel, and even where her avatar got her cape. Jen also talks about CISA’s priorities for the coming years, new cyber incident reporting requirements, and new cybersecurity help coming to a city near you. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For years, the international community has wrestled with how to reconcile sanctions policies targeting terrorist groups and other malevolent actors with the need to provide humanitarian assistance in areas under those groups’ control. Late last year, both the Biden administration and the UN Security Council took major steps toward a new approach on this issue, installing broad carveouts for humanitarian assistance into existing sanctions regimes. To talk through these changes, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with two leading sanctions experts: Rachel Alpert, a Partner at the law firm Jenner & Block and former State Department attorney, and Alex Zerden, the Founder and Principal of Capitol Peak Strategies and a former Treasury Department official, including at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. They talked about the long-standing issues surrounding humanitarian assistance, what these changes may mean in jurisdictions like Afghanistan, and where more changes may yet be forthcoming. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chip Brantley and Andrew Beck Grace are the creators of the NPR audio documentary White Lies, which was a Pulitzer finalist for its first season. Chip and Andrew are back for season 2, a story they began reporting in 2015 after they stumbled on an archival photo of a prison riot in Talladega, Alabama. This season focuses on the Mariel boatlift, a 6-month period in 1980 during which 125,000 Cubans emigrated to the United States to seek asylum. What they found is as much an American immigration story as a history of American immigration—and the laws that govern it.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Chip and Andrew to discuss the legal fictions that prop up the U.S. immigration system, how a country with due process under the law justifies detaining people indefinitely, and their obsession with Lady Bird Johnson’s White House audio diaries.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Naval Academy professor and cyberlaw expert Jeff "Two Effs" Kosseff to work through the week's big national security news stories, including:“Dox Populi.” Florida’s state legislature is the latest of several to propose laws requiring individuals involved in certain online activities to reveal their identities to the state. Are these requirements consistent with the First Amendment? What would they mean for civil society where they apply?“Recommend Forward.” The Biden administration has rolled out what some had previewed as a historic new cyber strategy. But it’s left some experts cold, in part because it seems to hinge on future enactments by a cooperative Congress—something that may not be in the cards. How revolutionary is it really?“Forget It, Jake. It’s the Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party.” The House select committee on China held its first hearing last week to much fanfare. How much is it a partisan political exercise? And to what degree might it actually steer U.S. policy on China in a better (or worse) direction?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 19, 2021: Jack Goldsmith spoke with New York Times cybersecurity reporter Nicole Perlroth about her new book, "This is How They Tell Me the World Ends: The Cyberweapons Arms Race." They discussed the dark world of markets for zero-day vulnerabilities that are so vital in offensive cyber operations, the history of the markets, how they work, who the players are and why the United States doesn't control as much as it used to. They also discussed broader issues of U.S. cybersecurity policy, including the recent SolarWinds hack.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kemba Walden recently took over from Chris Inglis as Acting National Cyber Director in the White House. She had been Principal Deputy Assistant National Cyber Director after serving in multiple cybersecurity positions in government and in the private sector.David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Kemba to talk about the challenges and opportunities of her new role, the recently released U.S. National Cyber Strategy and the significant policy changes it announces, threats to our national and economic security from China, and a fairly long discussion of music theory.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

During recent oral arguments in Gonzalez v. Google, a Supreme Court case concerning the scope of liability protections for internet platforms, Justice Neil Gorsuch asked a thought-provoking question. Does Section 230, the statute that shields websites from liability for third-party content, apply to a generative AI model like ChatGPT?  Luckily, Matt Perault of the Center on Technology Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill had already been thinking about this question and published a Lawfare article arguing that 230’s protections wouldn’t extend to content generated by AI. Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein sat down with Matt and Jess Miers, legal advocacy counsel at the Chamber of Progress, to debate whether ChatGPT’s output constitutes third-party content, whether companies like OpenAI should be immune for the output of their products, and why you might want to sue a chatbot in the first place.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A few weeks ago, Human Rights Watch released a report on the forced expulsion of the Chagossian people, whom the United Kingdom deported from their island homes in the Indian Ocean about 60 years ago to make way for the United States to build a military base called Diego Garcia. The report recommends reparations for the Chagossian people and a trial for individuals responsible for these crimes against humanity—the very first time the group has laid such a charge at the door of the US and UK. Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Philippe Sands, an international human rights lawyer who served as counsel for Mauritius in its bid to reclaim sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago. Philippe is the author of several books, including his most recent, "The Last Colony: A Tale of Exile, Justice and Britain's Colonial Legacy," which is about the islands. They discussed the Chagossian people’s decades-long legal struggle to return to their ancestral home, a chance phone call from a ski lift, and the role of race and identity in the making and application of international law. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On March 2, the Biden administration released its long-awaited National Cybersecurity Strategy. The new strategy comes more than two years after President Biden took office and sets out a bold vision to achieve a more cyber-secure future by the end of the decade. Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with our in-house cyber experts, Lawfare’s Senior Editor Stephanie Pell and Fellow in Tech Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri, to discuss the strategy and their latest piece published on Lawfare, titled “The Biden-Harris Administration Releases New National Cybersecurity Strategy.” Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Amichai Cohen and Yuval Shany are both Israeli legal scholars and longtime Lawfare contributors. Shany is a professor of international law at the Hebrew University Law School in Jerusalem. Cohen is a professor at Ono Academic College. They are both scholars at the Israel Democracy Institute, and together they are also co-authors of a six-part series in Lawfare about the ongoing effort by the Israeli government to alter the Israeli judicial system. It is a detailed account of a very serious reform operation in Israel, one that the authors argue is dangerous. They joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to discuss the ongoing protests in Israel, the ongoing legislative efforts, and the history of the Israeli judicial system and its growing power that has led to this crisis.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the past 20 years, Richard Haass has led the Council on Foreign Relations, building on his national security experience in government and his related work in academia and think tanks. Although his efforts have focused overwhelmingly on foreign policy, his central concern has turned to something closer to home: the decline of democratic norms in the United States. He's even written a new book about this problem and something we all can do about it, “The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.”David Priess and Haass discussed the State Department's Policy Planning Staff and Haass' experiences leading it, reflections on his service in the Bush 41 and Bush 43 administrations, the mission of the Council on Foreign Relations and Haass's longest-ever tenure of leading it, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its many implications, the roles of China and India in this shifting strategic landscape, democratic decline in the United States, the ten habits that American citizens can adopt to heal our divisions and safeguard representative democracy in the U.S., and more.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 7, 2019: Wargaming has long been a staple of military strategizing, but how do we plan for the future in cyberspace, a realm where governments do not hold a monopoly on capabilities? A new report from the Atlantic Council argues that "visualizing and describing the evolution of cyber capabilities and strategic competition require envisioning multiple futures," and the report sets out to do exactly that. This week, Lawfare's Susan Hennessey sat down with John Watts, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, and JD Work, the Bren Chair for Cyber Conflict and Security at the Marine Corps University, who are authors of "Alternate Cybersecurity Futures," along with Nina Kollars, Ben Jensen, and Chris Whyte. They talked about the behind-the-scenes of strategic policy planning, the value of creativity, and what scenarios emerge when you ask cybersecurity experts to predict the future.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Lawfare Publisher David Priess wore his hat as a Senior Fellow at George Mason University's Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security to host a rare live conversation on counterintelligence with leading practitioners. His guests were Mirriam-Grace MacIntyre, Executive Director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center (NCSC), and Alan Kohler, Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division at the FBI. They discussed the organization known as the NCSC, the role it plays across the U.S. Government and beyond, and how the FBI's long-running counterintelligence efforts play into it. They talked a lot about the People's Republic of China and its extensive intelligence efforts against the U.S., as well as about counterintelligence and science, outreach to the public on these issues, how Congress fits in, and more. The event was not brief, so we have edited it slightly for length without losing any significant substance.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since December, Peru has been in the midst of a protracted politico crisis. Following a failed coup in early December, President Pedro Castillo was arrested, becoming the fifth president to leave office in Peru in five years. In the midst of protests, Castillo’s deputy Dina Boluarte took power. But protests have continued in the following months, with roughly 60 people dead—mostly protestors killed by the police and the military, as the Peruvian government takes an increasingly authoritarian turn. After Castillo’s departure from office in December, Lawfare published a podcast conversation with Rodrigo Barrenechea, a 2022/23 Santo Domingo Visiting Scholar at the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University and an assistant professor at the Departamento de Ciencias Sociales of the Universidad Católica del Uruguay. With the violence and unrest continuing to unfold, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic asked Rodrigo back on the podcast for an update on where things stand. He explained why he thinks that Peru may no longer be fairly described as a democracy and why it’s hard to see an end to this crisis any time soon.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Matthew Olsen, the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division at the U.S. Department of Justice, gave yesterday a major address at the Brookings Institution. He talked about FISA Section 702, the section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that allows U.S. intelligence authorities to collect against targets reasonably believed to be overseas when their signals pass through the United States. The provision comes up for reauthorization this year, and Olsen argues that it is imperative that Congress act to reauthorize it. This audio from the Brookings event includes an introduction from Camille Busette, the Interim Vice President for Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution; remarks from Olsen; a Q&A between Olsen and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes; and questions from the live audience.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There was a big showdown at the D.C. Circuit last week over the Speech or Debate Clause and Representative Scott Perry and his cell phone, the latter of which was seized by the FBI in connection with the Jan. 6 investigation. Representative Perry wants it back, and he does not want anything on it used in the investigation. He went to Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and moved to quash the order for his phone. The judge said no, Perry’s legal team appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held arguments last week. To discuss it all, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic and Scott Anderson, and Dominic Solari, a Lawfare student contributor who wrote an oral argument preview and summary of the case.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Remember Havana Syndrome? Diplomats, spies, and other people suddenly hearing a loud noise and then having neurological symptoms, sometimes debilitating... Was it a mass panic? Was it a sonic weapon? Was it a directed energy weapon? And who was wielding it? These are the subjects of The Sound: Mystery of Havana Syndrome, a new podcast series put out by Goat Rodeo, PRX, and Project Brazen. Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with journalist and host Nicky Woolf, and producer Max Johnston of Goat Rodeo, to talk about the truth of Havana Syndrome. Was it real, or was it a fantasy? What kind of weapon could do that sort of thing, and could you build one at home? And who would want to shoot a ray gun at U.S. personnel all over the world?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott sat through literally hours of oral arguments to prepare to discuss all the national security developments in the news, including:“The HIMAR Anniversary.” The war in Ukraine is one year old this week. The Biden administration marked the occasion with a presidential visit to Kyiv and a finding of crimes against humanity, while Vladimir Putin celebrated by moving the Doomsday Clock a bit closer to midnight. What should we make of where the war stands one year in?“We’re Living in a Post-Algorithm World, and I’m a Post-Algorithm Girl.” So said Justice Elena Kagan (more or less), as she and the other members of the Supreme Court heard arguments in Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh on terrorism liability and the scope of protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—a case that some argue could break the internet. What did we learn from oral arguments? And what might the ramifications be?“Bold Dominion.” Dominion Voting Systems filed a stunning brief in its defamation lawsuit against Fox News earlier this week, which lays out in 200 detailed pages the extent to which Fox’s executives and on-air personalities knowingly amplified lies about the company’s conduct around the 2020 election. What did we learn about Fox’s culpability? And what would a Dominion win mean moving forward?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 18, 2021: On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, the Lawfare Podcast’s miniseries on our online information ecosystem, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford's Cyber Policy Center and an expert on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the statute that shields internet platforms from civil liability for third-party content on their websites. The statute has been criticized by both Democrats and Republicans, and both President Trump and President Biden separately called for its repeal. So what should we expect in terms of potential revision of 230 during the current Congress? What does Daphne think about the various proposals on the table? And how is it that so many proposals to reform 230 would be foiled by that pesky First Amendment?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s the first anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia. To talk about this first year and what comes next, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis. In a kind of tour of what's been happening in the region over the past year, they discussed what’s been going on in Ukraine, in Russia, in Eastern Europe, in Western Europe, and of course, in the United States.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Tuesday and Wednesday of this week, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a pair of cases concerning to what extent online platforms can be held responsible for terrorist content on their services. Gonzalez v. Google focused on the scope of Section 230, which shields platforms from liability for third-party content. Twitter v. Taamneh, meanwhile, concerned whether platforms can be held liable under the Anti-Terrorism Act if members of terrorist groups use their services to recruit and spread their message. Oral arguments took a combined five hours as the justices slogged through these difficult questions about the functioning of the modern internet. Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic, Scott R. Anderson, and Alan Rozenshtein, and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes, sat down to discuss.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Special Counsel Jack Smith has issued a subpoena to former Vice President Mike Pence as part of the investigation into Trump’s role in instigating the Jan. 6 riot. But Pence has said he’ll fight the subpoena. And he’s pointed to the Speech or Debate Clause—a constitutional immunity that protects members of Congress—on the argument that he was acting as part of the legislative branch when he presided over the electoral count on January 6, 2021.Setting aside Pence’s motives for taking this approach, the merits of the legal argument are less crazy than they might sound. Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic and Molly Reynolds sat down to talk through these issues with two former congressional lawyers: Eric Columbus, who recently served as Special Litigation Counsel in the House Office of General Counsel under Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Mike Stern, a former senior counsel to the House of Representatives.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chris Inglis has had an illustrious career in the defense of this country, serving as an Air Force general, deputy director of the National Security Agency, and most recently as the first National Cyber Director in the White House. Chris stepped down from his position last week, and he sat down for his first interview as a private citizen with David Kris, Lawfare contributor and former assistant attorney general for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare contributor and executive director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute. They talked about a wide range of cyber topics, including the newly minted National Cyber Strategy, protection of critical infrastructure, cyber insurance, competition in the international front, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 30, 2021: When President Biden entered office, he inherited a bilateral relationship with Turkey that was strained to the limits by the growing independent streak in that country's foreign policy—and one that had been pushed in unfamiliar directions by his predecessor's direct and often unpredictable personal relationship with Turkey's longstanding president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. This past week, the Biden administration made its first major move on the U.S.-Turkey relationship by recognizing the atrocities committed against Armenians by Ottoman authorities in the early 20th century as a genocide, a move that prior presidents had avoided for fear of how Turkey might react.To discuss what these developments may mean for this key bilateral relationship, Scott R. Anderson sat down with Nicholas Danforth of the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy and Asli Aydıntaşbaş of the European Council on Foreign Relations. They discussed how Turkey views its place in the world, what this means for its alliance with the United States and how the Biden administration is likely to respond moving forward.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Along with co-editors Peter Feaver, William Inboden, and Meghan O'Sullivan, former National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley is editor of the new “Hand-Off: The Foreign Policy George W. Bush Passed to Barack Obama.” This unique and massive book contains 30 Transition Memos prepared in 2008–2009 under Hadley's direction by the outgoing George W. Bush administration’s National Security Council staff for the incoming Obama Administration—each with a postscript by these same experts critically assessing the Bush foreign policy legacy.Historians and national security junkies usually have to wait a long time for such materials to see the light of day; this consolidated content reveals much, and relatively quickly, about the various policies of the time and the extensive effort that was put into the gold-standard 2008–2009 transition.David Priess asked Hadley about his experiences with presidential transitions dating back to the 1970s; how it felt to be on the receiving end of the transition process in 2000–2001; President George W. Bush's transition mandate to him and to Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in 2008; the substantive NSC Transition Memos on the Freedom Agenda, the War on Terror, Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, and PEPFAR; public perceptions of the national security advisor's role; how much national security advisors should interact with the media; and more.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 6, 2021: Natan Sachs is a Brookings senior fellow and the head of the Brookings Center for Middle East Policy, part of the Brookings Foreign Policy program. Benjamin Wittes sat down with Natan to talk about the results of the Israeli election, which are still unclear amid a haze over the entire political system. They talked about what the dispute between the camps is about, the many different factions and what they want, and why they can't sit together easily in a government. They also talked about the fact that Israel doesn't have a budget for the second year in a row, and they discussed whether anyone will be able to prevent the fifth election in two years.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On February 14, the Brookings Institution hosted an event on the upcoming Supreme Court oral arguments in Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh—two cases that could potentially reshape the internet. The Court is set to hear arguments in both cases next week, on February 21 and 22. Depending on how the justices rule, Gonzalez could result in substantial changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the bedrock legal protection on which the internet is built. For today’s podcast, we’re bringing you audio of that discussion. Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic moderated a panel that included Hany Farid, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, with a joint appointment in electrical engineering & computer sciences and the School of Information; Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center; Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein; and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this month, a Pakistani man named Majid Khan started his new life in Belize after spending nearly half his previous life in U.S. detention, first at a CIA black site where he was subjected to torture and other mistreatment, and then at Guantanamo Bay. Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Karen J. Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at Fordham University School of Law, and the author of several books, to discuss one of Khan's fellow inmates, Saifullah Paracha, as well Saifullah’s son Uzair. They discussed Karen's recent Lawfare article on the Parachas, the separate but intertwined systems of justice that the father and son navigated, and Guantanamo Bay's fraught past and uncertain future.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Jan. 6 committee’s final report on the insurrection is over 800 pages, including the footnotes. But there’s still new information coming out about the committee’s findings and its work.Last week, we brought you an interview with Dean Jackson, one of the staffers who worked on the Jan. 6 committee’s investigation into the role of social media in the insurrection. Today, we’re featuring a conversation with Jacob Glick, who served as investigative counsel on the committee and is currently a policy counsel at Georgetown’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection. His work in the Jan. 6 investigation focused on social media and far-right extremism. Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Jacob about what the investigation showed him about the forces that led to Jan. 6, how he understands the threat still posed by extremism, and what it was like interviewing Twitter whistleblowers and members of far-right groups who stormed the Capitol.You can read Jacob’s essay with Mary McCord on countering extremism here in Just Security and listen to an interview with Jacob and his Jan. 6 committee colleagues here at Tech Policy Press.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month's brutal murder of Tyre Nichols by Memphis police has once again sparked a national conversation about the causes of and remedies for persistent police misconduct and abuse. To explore this issue, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Joanna Schwartz, a law professor at UCLA School of Law, who is the author of a new book called, “Shielded: How the Police Became Untouchable.” The book argues that police abuse is a result of pervasive pathologies in the legal system that shield from accountability not just police officers, but also their supervisors and the local governments for which they work.Joanna and Jack discussed the many accountability gaps in the legal regime governing police abuse. Like her book, they focused on problems of achieving justice through the civil rights system, problems that include the high bars to finding a lawyer and to convincing a judge to hear the case, Fourth Amendment doctrine, qualified immunity, and the challenges of municipal liability. They also discussed the best path to reform and the prospects of reform.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since it launched in November of last year, ChatGPT has been subject to widespread attention. Cyber criminals have been quick to try to find ways to abuse the AI tool for their own purposes, from improving their phishing emails and supporting money-making schemes, to writing malware. Could ChatGPT help lower entry barriers for less skilled cyber criminals to be? To answer that question, Lawfare fellow in technology policy and law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Alexander Leslie, associate threat intelligence analyst at Recorded Future. Alexander was the lead analyst for the recent report, “I, Chatbot,” which looked at how threat actors are trying to misuse ChatGPT. They discussed who are the threat actors that can benefit from it the most, the impact this will have on the cybercrime-as-a-service business model, and how to think through mitigation strategies. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined once again by host emeritus Benjamin Wittes to talk through the week's various freak-outs, including:“We Found the 100th Luftballon.” Last week, a Chinese spy balloon floated over the United States, triggering a national freak-out that led to the cancellation of a major high-level summit between U.S. and Chinese leaders. Was this freak-out warranted? What does it tell us about U.S.-China relations?“SotFU.” President Biden delivered his second State of the Union address last night—and it was about as contentious as expected. How did he do? And how should we feel about this most vaunted of national institutions?“ChatOMG.” Over the past several weeks, countless Americans have had the chance to hash it out with ChatGPT, a large language-model artificial intelligence that is open to the public and will either revolutionize or devastate a thousand different human tasks, depending on who you ask. Just how revolutionary is ChatGPT? And is that a good thing or a bad thing?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 2, 2018: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) plays an essential role in advising the president on how to exercise his or her authority to block foreign investments that might let the U.S.'s adversaries acquire sensitive American technology or intellectual property. A bipartisan proposal in Congress aims to expand CFIUS’s powers. On Thursday, the Center for Strategic and International Studies convened a panel of Dov Zakheim, a former Pentagon official; Ivan Schlager, a partner with Skadden Arps’ national security practice; Nova Daly, a senior public policy adviser with Wiley Rein; and CSIS Vice President James Andrew Lewis, to talk about CFIUS and how it might change under the new law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

International law has been under significant stress in the last decade as a result of global populism, the rise of China, the war in Ukraine, and the challenges of the pandemic, climate change, and cybersecurity threats, among many others. To discuss why international law seems to be failing in important respects and what to do about it, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Paul Stephan, the John C. Jeffries, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia, and author of the new book, “The World Crisis and International Law: The Knowledge Economy and the Battle for the Future.” They discussed whether international law is truly failing, and if so, how; Stephan's claim that the accelerating pace of technological change induced by the knowledge economy best explains international law’s unraveling; why the highest courts of important states are increasingly rejecting international law and the orders of international courts and tribunals; and Stephan's bottom-up prescriptions for these problems.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On January 26, the Department of Justice held a press conference to announce its months-long disruption campaign against the Hive ransomware group that has targeted more than 1,500 victims in over 80 countries around the world, including hospitals, school districts, financial firms, and critical infrastructure. In July 2022, the FBI penetrated Hive’s computer networks, captured its decryption keys, and, over the course of the ensuing months, offered the decryption keys to victims worldwide, preventing these victims from having to pay $130 million in ransom that Hive demanded. To talk about this disruption operation, Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Alex Iftimie, partner at the law firm Morrison Foerster and a former federal prosecutor in the National Security and Cyber Crimes Units in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. They talked about how the Hive ransomware group operated, the significant aspects of this disruption operation, and how this disruption operation fits into the broader picture of U.S. government efforts to disrupt ransomware groups and actors.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Jan. 6 Committee released its final report on December 22, 2022—the capstone of a year and half of investigative work. But while the report is 800 pages, there’s a lot that it doesn’t include. The Washington Post recently reported on the work done by investigators looking into the role of social media in enabling the insurrection—work that wasn’t incorporated into the final document.Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Dean Jackson, project manager of the Influence Operations Researchers’ Guild at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He served as an investigative analyst with the Jan. 6 committee, investigating the role of social media in the insurrection. They talked about his experience working on the investigation and what his team uncovered—and walked through what got left out from the final report.You can read Dean’s essay with fellow Jan. 6 committee staffers Meghan Conroy and Alex Newhouse here on Just Security and listen to an interview with Dean and his colleagues here at Tech Policy Press.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How does computer hacking work? When is it good, and when is it bad? And what does it have to teach us about law, politics, and inequality? These are some of the questions that Bruce Schneier, a well-known security expert and lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School, answers in his new book, “A Hacker's Mind: How the Powerful Bend Society's Rules and How to Bend Them Back.”Jack Goldsmith sat down with Bruce to discuss what it means to have a hacker's mind, why all systems—not just computer systems—are hackable, how and why the powerful and wealthy are typically the most successful hackers, and what AI will mean for hacking various systems. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, the United States and the Philippines reached an agreement to expand U.S. military operations in the Philippines to deter China's increasingly aggressive actions toward Taiwan and in the South China Sea. The news was sandwiched between Air Force General Mike Minihan predicting that U.S. confrontation with China may happen as early as 2025 and Secretary Antony Blinken postponing his trip to China after a Chinese surveillance balloon was detected flying over the United States. Lawfare legal fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Dr. Oriana Skylar Mastro, a Center Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and non-resident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, to discuss the likelihood of military confrontation between the United States and China over Taiwan, and whether the United States has exhausted all of its deterrent capabilities to stall China from invading Taiwan.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A sunken Soviet submarine. A secret CIA plan to lift it from the bottom of the ocean with a giant claw. And reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes. It sounds like the makings of a Netflix series—and it should be. But the story of the Glomar Explorer is the stuff of fact, even if it has long been shrouded in secrecy.  In his new book, intelligence historian M. Todd Bennett pierces the veil surrounding this most improbable of intelligence operations and surfaces a riveting tale of underwater espionage and high-stakes foreign policy. The sub-salvage mission, which the CIA codenamed AZORIAN, was green-lit at a time of remarkable daring and ingenuity by the spy agency, which enjoyed only minimal oversight from Congress. But journalists brought the Glomar operation to light in another era, when scandals and excesses led lawmakers to rein in the intelligence community.  Shane Harris talks with Bennett about his book, “Neither Confirm nor Deny: How the Glomar Mission Shielded the CIA from Transparency,” which shows how the exposure of the secret program led to a public backlash against disclosures of classified information and helped reinforce the culture of secrecy that envelops the CIA’s work. The phrase “neither confirm nor deny,” which Bennett tells Harris has become a kind of coy cliche, originates from attempts to uncover the facts of the Glomar mission. Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 3, 2020: Dr. Rashawn Ray is a David M. Rubenstein fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. He's also an associate professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park, where he directs the Lab for Applied Social Science Research (LASSR). He is a scholar of, among other things, police-civilian relations and has done a lot of work on police-involved killings. He joined Benjamin Wittes to discuss the mechanisms of police violence, what causes it, what can be done to address it and reduce it, and the role of race in this problem. They talked about police unions, implicit bias, the difference between legality and morality in police shootings and what policy levers are available to bring an end to the rash of police killings.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Next month will mark the five-year anniversary of the CLOUD Act, a foundational piece of legislation on cross-border data transfers and criminal investigations. Before he was a University of Minnesota law professor and senior editor at Lawfare, Alan Rozenshtein worked in the Department of Justice where he was a member of the team that developed the CLOUD Act. In that capacity, he interacted with representatives from the large tech companies that would be most directly affected by the law. One of these people was Matt Perault, then the head of Global Policy Development at Facebook, and now the director of the Center on Technology Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Matt joined Alan to discuss the CLOUD Act with two more people who were present at its creation: Greg Nojeim, senior counsel and director of the Security and Surveillance Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, and Aaron Cooper, a partner at the law firm of Jenner & Block, who was at the time a colleague of Alan’s at the Department of Justice. They talked about the reasons for the CLOUD Act’s development, whether it has succeeded in its goals, and what we should expect to see in the next five years.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last December, a German court convicted a 97-year-old former Nazi camp secretary of complicity in the murder of more than 10,000 people in what the media called—once again—the last Nazi trial. After almost eight decades, the Holocaust is still being litigated, remembered, and all-too-often misremembered.Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Linda Kinstler, author of the book, “Come to This Court and Cry: How the Holocaust Ends,” and Sam Moyn, a professor of both history and law at Yale University, to discuss Linda's book. They talked about Linda's stunning discovery in Latvia that led her to tell this story, the limits of the law in holding perpetrators of mass murder accountable, and whether the antonym of forgetting is not remembering, but justice.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You've likely heard of ChatGPT, the chatbot from OpenAI. But you’ve likely never heard an interview with ChatGPT, much less an interview in which ChatGPT reflects on its own impact on the information ecosystem. Nor is it likely that you’ve ever heard ChatGPT promising to stop producing racist and misogynistic content. But, on this episode of Arbiters of Truth, Lawfare’s occasional series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with ChatGPT to talk about a range of things: the pronouns it prefers; academic integrity and the chatbot’s likely impact on that; and importantly, the experiments performed by a scholar name Eve Gaumond, who has been on a one-woman campaign to get ChatGPT to write offensive content. ChatGPT made some pretty solid representations that this kind of thing may be in its past, but wouldn't ever be in its future again.So, following Ben’s interview with ChatGPT, he sat down with Eve Gaumond, an AI scholar at the Public Law Center of the University of Montréal, who fact-checked ChatGPT's claims. Can you still get it to write a poem entitled, “She Was Smart for a Woman”? Can you get it to write a speech by Heinrich Himmler about Jews? And can you get ChatGPT to write a story belittling the Holocaust?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It seems like everyone has classified documents stashed away these days. First, it was Donald Trump, with the Justice Department investigation into documents stored improperly at Mar-a-Lago. Then, it was Joe Biden, with news that documents bearing classification markings were found at Biden’s Wilmington home and at the Penn Biden Center. And now, former Vice President Mike Pence has also uncovered classified materials at his home. What on earth is going on?Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes, publisher David Priess, and senior editor Scott Anderson to discuss. They talked about why classified documents are suddenly showing up everywhere; how to understand the differences between the Trump, Biden, and Pence cases; and what to make of the pickle that Attorney General Merrick Garland now finds himself in. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the last several days, Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff has been in court covering the Proud Boys trial on a live blog on Lawfare. The trial took a two-day break the other day, so Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Roger to catch up on what is proving to be a grueling presentation of evidence. They talked about how the government has been doing in presenting its case against Enrique Tarrio and the other Proud Boys, where the defense has scored points, what evidence is left still to present, and how long this trial is likely to go.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by special guest Michel Paradis to talk over the week's big national security news, including:“Don’t Tank my Chain.” Western allies of Ukraine have finally agreed to a way forward on providing the country with tanks, an issue which has proven surprisingly contentious in recent weeks. Germany will now allow its Leopard tanks to be used in the near-term while the United States will send Ukraine a series of M1 Abrams in the future, meeting the German demand for a matched U.S. contribution. Why was this so important to Germany? And what does it tell us about the broader state of the war?“Slight of the Valkyries.” The U.S. Treasury Department has slapped new sanctions on the Russian mercenary group, the Wagner Group, labeling them a Transnational Criminal Organization (“TCO”)—even as U.S. officials continue to resist calls to designate them a terrorist organization. What explains this reticence? Is it warranted?“Empire State of Mind.” For the first time, the New York City district attorney is trying someone under state criminal laws barring material support for terrorism that the state adopted following the September 11 attacks—even though the criminal suspect was never present in New York, but merely knew his actions would have repercussions there. Is this a sensible move? Or is there reason for pause? Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From August 18, 2018: The President of the United States this week stripped the former CIA Director John Brennan of his security clearance in a dramatic White House statement by Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. The White House is threatening more adverse security clearance actions against presidential critics, and former senior security officials are outraged. Benjamin Wittes sat down Friday afternoon with Bradley Moss, who represents people in security clearance revocation processes, to discuss the president's move, how different it is from a normal security clearance action, and what we can expect if a lawsuit develops.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Russia’s use of information warfare during the 2016 U.S. presidential election period focused attention on Russia’s weaponization of information in its effort to influence a U.S. election outcome and sow discord across the American public. But to the extent that we only view Russian information warfare as an aggressive or expansionist expression of Moscow’s foreign policy, we may misunderstand some key tenets of Russian information warfare doctrine. To gain a better understanding of the history and dynamics of Russian information warfare, Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Gavin Wilde, senior fellow in the Technology and International Affairs Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Justin Sherman, nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Cyber Statecraft Initiative. They discussed their new paper, "No Water’s Edge: Russia’s Information War and Regime Security,” and they talked about Russian information doctrine under Vladimir Putin, the differences between how the concept of information security is understood in Russia versus the West, and some key takeaways of their research for analysts and policymakers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Turkish President Erdoğan has thrown a giant wrench into Sweden's NATO membership bid after a protest outside the Turkish embassy in Stockholm. This, in turn, affects Finland's application to the alliance because Sweden and Finland applied to and intended to join the alliance concurrently.Lawfare publisher David Priess sat down with Minna Ålander, research fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, to talk about how we got here, about what Finnish leaders have been saying about these new developments, and about paths forward for Finland and NATO.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Judge Robert McBurney of the Superior Court of Fulton County held a hearing on Tuesday to decide whether or not to release the Fulton County Special Grand Jury's report on 2020 election interference in Georgia. Lawfare's Fulton County correspondent Anna Bower was in the room live-blogging the matter, and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes caught up with her right after the hearing to talk it through. Why did the district attorney argue that the report should continue to be sealed for now? What were the media organizations’ arguments, and which way was Judge McBurney leaning? Is the report going to become public? And if so, when? Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2019, investigative journalist and photographer Lynzy Billing went to Afghanistan to investigate a very personal story: her own past. In the process, she discovered what she came to call a classified war, one with lines of accountability so obscured that no one had to answer publicly for operations that went wrong.Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Lynzy to talk through her four-year investigation, published last month in ProPublica. They discussed Afghanistan's shady Zero Units and their relationship with the CIA, the traumatic ripple effects caused by this lack of accountability, and why the U.S. continues to rely on a strategy of night raids, which Lynzy describes as quick, brutal operations that went wrong far more often than the U.S. has acknowledged. They also discussed why Lynzy decided to tell this story when few others would. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tech policy reform occupies a strange place in Washington, D.C. Everyone seems to agree that the government should change how it regulates the technology industry, on issues from content moderation to privacy—and yet, reform never actually seems to happen. But while the federal government continues to stall, state governments are taking action. More and more, state-level officials are proposing and implementing changes in technology policy. Most prominently, Texas and Florida recently passed laws restricting how platforms can moderate content, which will likely be considered by the Supreme Court later this year.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our occasional series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with J. Scott Babwah Brennen and Matt Perault of the Center on Technology Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill. In recent months, they’ve put together two reports on state-level tech regulation. They talked about what’s driving this trend, why and how state-level policymaking differs—and doesn’t—from policymaking at the federal level, and what opportunities and complications this could create.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For almost 25 years, until his death in November 2018, former president George H. W. Bush's chief of staff was Jean Becker. For event after event through both the best of those times and the worst—from dozens of affirming trips overseas to several parachute jumps in his latter years to many funerals—Becker was there to schedule it, plan it, manage it, and often attend it. All of this has given her a uniquely wide and deep understanding of the challenges and rewards of a long post-presidency.For the 30th anniversary of Bush 41's departure from the White House, Lawfare publisher David Priess chatted with Becker about how she first came to work with First Lady Barbara Bush, how that led to her work as chief of staff for Bush after he'd left office, the diverse activities of a lengthy post-presidency, former presidents' interactions with intelligence and classified material, Bush 41's choice to refrain from frequent political statements, his relationships with other presidents ranging from his son to Bill Clinton to Barack Obama to Joe Biden, and what a chief of staff for a former president actually does.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 11, 2020: This week, the Supreme Court returned once again to the complex and sometimes controversial Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, or FSIA, that protects foreign sovereigns from litigation before U.S. courts. At the same time, Congress is once again debating new exceptions to the protections provided by the FSIA on issues ranging from cybercrime to the coronavirus pandemic, an effort that may risk violating international law and exposing the United States to similar lawsuits overseas. To discuss these developments and where they may be headed, Scott R. Anderson sat down with two leading scholars on sovereign immunity issues: Chimène Keitner, a professor at the UC Hastings School of Law and a former counselor on international law at the U.S. State Department, and Ingrid Wuerth, a professor at Vanderbilt University Law School and one of the reporters for the American Law Institute's Fourth Restatement on U.S. foreign relations law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We have just ended Biden's first two years as president, and it's a great time to reflect back on the wild national security ride we’ve had. In fact, Chris Whipple has just done that by publishing his book, “The Fight of His Life: Inside Joe Biden's White House,” a deeply reported book that contains many interviews with Biden's inner circle.Lawfare publisher David Priess spoke with Chris about the transition from Trump to Biden, Biden's decision to pull out of Afghanistan, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration's strategy of releasing intelligence before the invasion to try to both preempt the invasion and prepare European allies for what would come afterward, and much more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the wake of September 11, 2001, federal law enforcement agencies were caught flatfooted when they realized that they'd had the intel to prevent the attack on the homeland, but they'd failed to connect those dots. Fusion centers were born out of an abundance of caution to share and streamline counterterrorism information between the federal level and state and local levels. Since then, the Department of Homeland Security has supported the development of a national network of 80 fusion centers across the United States. And while its principle goal initially was to disseminate counterterrorism intel from the state and local levels, it's now expanded to include the sharing of intelligence regarding crimes or hazards more broadly. Last month, the Brennan Center released a report entitled, “Ending Fusion Center Abuses,” explaining how fusion centers’ domestic intelligence model has undermined American's privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. Lawfare legal fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Michael German, a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program, who co-authored the report, as well as Thomas Warrick, a non-resident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security Forward Defense Practice at the Atlantic Council. They discussed how fusion centers were conceived, where they've excelled as intelligence centers, and where they've abused their powers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2019, the U.S. government took a step that it had never taken before. It brought criminal charges against a foreign state-owned bank, Turkiye Halk Bankasi, or Halkbank, which is majority-owned by the country of Turkiye (until recently known as Turkey), for evading U.S. sanctions on Iran. Turkiye in turn argued that such a move was not only unprecedented but prohibited by the legal immunities it is entitled to under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, or FSIA. Yesterday, those arguments reached the U.S. Supreme Court where both sides seemed to agree on just one thing—that the court's eventual decision could well have major consequences for the United States and its foreign relations.To talk through oral arguments in Halkbank, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with two leading sovereign immunity experts: Professor Chimène Keitner of the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, and Professor Ingrid Wuerth of Vanderbilt Law School. They discussed how each side reads the FSIA and other related statutes, whether any of the justices seemed particularly persuaded, and where the court—as well as the broader issue—seems likely to go from here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lawfare fellow in technology policy and law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Laurent Richard and Sandrine Rigaud to talk about their new book, “Pegasus: How a Spy in Your Pocket Threatens the End of Privacy, Dignity, and Democracy.” Laurent is the founder and executive director of Forbidden Stories, and Sandrine is its editor-in-chief. Along with Amnesty International’s Security Lab, they led the investigative effort by 17 international media organizations that in July 2021 exposed how some governments regularly used the Pegasus spyware against journalists, human rights activists, political dissidents, and others. Their new book tells the story of how they conducted this investigation. Laurent and Sandrine talked about the operational security concerns they had to balance, how they coordinated this international effort, and the impact of their work. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From August 17, 2019: Andrew Beck Grace and Chip Brantley are the creators of the NPR podcast audio documentary White Lies, which deals with the murder of Rev. James Reeb in Selma, Alabama, during the Civil Rights Era. The podcast is an incredible historical investigation of an episode that many people had forgotten, and resonates remarkably in contemporary discussions of domestic terrorism, white supremacist violence, and many other things we're still talking about today.Benjamin Wittes talked with Andrew and Chip about how to tell the story of a murder that happened a long time ago, the FBI's role in investigating the crime at the time (what they did badly, and what they did right), and what it all says about terrorism today.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, a Quinta-less Alan and Scott were joined by their Lawfare colleagues senior editor Molly Reynolds and managing editor Tyler McBrien to talk over some copycat-ing that's been taking place in the national security space, including:“Hoppin’ the Fence at Lulapalooza.” In a clear echo of the Jan. 6 insurrection, followers of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro sacked the country’s parliament this past week, just days after his successor Lula da Silva was sworn in—and while Bolsonaro himself was visiting former U.S. President Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate. What’s the relationship between Jan. 6 and Brazil’s recent experience? Is this the beginning of a dangerous global trend?“The Divider House Rules.” After fifteen votes, Rep. Kevin McCarthy is now the Speaker of the House. But to get there, he had to make a lot of concessions—many of which are now showing their face in the House rules and in committee appointments, while others remain secret. What constraints has McCarthy accepted in order to win office? And will they mean for the coming Congress?“C’mon, Man!” Several months after FBI agents raised former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate to recover classified documents, lawyers for current President Biden have acknowledged that they located a few classified documents from his time as vice president in Biden’s private office as well. Critics in Congress and elsewhere are crying out that this reflects a double-standard, but does it? How big a deal is this, and what will it mean for the ongoing Mar-a-Lago investigation?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 21, 2015: This week, we invited Major General Michael Lehnert (Ret.), the first commander of the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to chat on the show. In January 2002, General Lehnert deployed to Guantanamo Bay as Commander of Joint Task Force 160 with the mission to construct and operate the detention facilities for Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees. He is now one of the more prominent voices calling for the closure of the prison facility. In the interview, General Lehnert describes those early days of uncertainty before GITMO became "GITMO," how, while facing a policy vacuum in Washington, he built and managed the facility, and what he thinks should be done with the remaining detainees now. In the end, he offers advice for how future policymakers can avoid mistakes when conducting critical missions and making hard national security choices.You can read General Lehnert's most recent piece calling for the closure of Guantanamo Bay detention facility at Politico. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yesterday afternoon, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that he has appointed a special counsel to investigate the revelations that documents bearing classification markings had been found in President Biden's private office and residence. The appointment comes after a preliminary investigation that began on November 14, just days before a different special counsel was appointed to investigate documents found at former President Trump's residence. To go through it all, Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Lawfare contributor Paul Rosenzweig, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes, and Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson. They talked about why these circumstances triggered the special counsel regulations, what we know about potential criminal exposure, and how this may impact the ongoing special counsel investigation of Donald Trump.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's Proud Boys Trial Day at the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse in Washington, DC, when five leaders of the right wing paramilitary gang go on trial in a 10-count seditious conspiracy indictment.To talk about this second major seditious conspiracy indictment, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff, who will be there live blogging it for the site. They talked about how it compares with the Oath Keepers case, which wrapped up over the fall. They talked about how the evidence is different, the Proud Boys being a bit more into the whole violence thing than the Oath Keepers. They talked about whether there was a plan, and they talked about whether the defendants can get a fair trial in the overwhelmingly Democratic District of Columbia.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Various press reports have indicated that the Biden administration intends to release its cyber strategy in the coming weeks. The cyber strategy will likely cover a range of issues. One potential topic could involve the creation of a federal response or “backstop” to the financial exposure risks that insurers and reinsurers face from future catastrophic cyber incidents affecting those that they insure. To talk about the pros and cons of a federal backstop for the cyber insurance ecosystem, Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Bryan Cunningham, executive director of the Cybersecurity Research and Policy Institute at the University California, Irvine, who co-authored the article, “Uncle Sam Re: Improving Cyber Hygiene and Increasing Confidence in the Cyber Insurance Ecosystem via Government Backstopping.” They talked about what is keeping cyber insurance executives up at night, why the cyber insurance industry has not incentivized better cyber hygiene by the insured, and how a federally funded backstop could assist in shoring up the cyber insurance ecosystem.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

District Attorney of Fulton County Fani Willis has completed her special grand jury investigation of election tampering in 2020. The special purpose grand jury has completed its report and has been dissolved, and the supervising judge yesterday scheduled a hearing for January 24 to decide whether to make the report public. What will happen next? Will there be indictments? Are they going to wait until after the report comes out, or should we expect them imminently? Should we expect a Trump indictment coming next?To go over it all, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare contributor Anna Bower, Georgia State University Law Professor Anthony Michael Kreis, and Tamar Hallerman of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and co-host of the podcast Breakdown, which has followed the special grand jury from the beginning. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Friday evening, we had no idea if Kevin McCarthy was going to be elected speaker or not, so Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Brookings senior fellow and Lawfare senior editor Molly Reynolds to talk through the options. They talked about why it actually matters if you have a Speaker of the House, how long the House of Representatives can go without one before the government falls apart, and the consequences of the compromises Kevin McCarthy made.On Sunday afternoon, Ben and Molly sat down again to record an update to their earlier conversation based on the results of Friday night’s vote.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Abigail Spanberger, who represents Virginia's 7th congressional district in the House of Representatives, is one of the few members of Congress to have served as an operations officer at the Central Intelligence Agency. She also worked in law enforcement as an officer of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. Not typical experiences for a thrice-elected politician—but useful for the role she finds herself in now.On this episode of Chatter, David Priess chatted with Rep. Spanberger about her recent re-election to the House, the nature of "swing districts," working across the aisle, her road to working at CIA, her experiences as a postal inspector and intelligence operations officer, what she sees as important national security issues right now, her advice for former colleagues considering a run for elective office, and how listening skills she learned at CIA have helped her as a representative.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 6, 2021: Today a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol following a rally at which the president spoke. Congressional efforts to count the electoral votes were suspended, and an armed standoff, in which at least one person was killed, ensued. To discuss the matter, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Quinta Jurecic; David Priess; Georgetown's Mary McCord, who used to run the National Security Division at the Justice Department; and Daniel Byman, a professor at Georgetown and Lawfare's foreign policy editor.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s January 6—the second anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection. There has been a lot of activity in those two years to account for what happened on that terrible day.To go over it all, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett and Lawfare senior editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff. They discussed what has been done across the many diverse areas in which we have sought accountability for Jan. 6—to do justice, to tell the story, and to make legal and policy changes to prevent this from ever happening again. They talked about criminal investigations and prosecutions, the Jan. 6 committee, congressional storytelling, the legislative process, what is left to do, and what’s been left undone. And they consider a big question: are we safer now than we were then?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a few months ago that something went boom under the sea and the Nord Stream 2 pipelines were severely damaged. Everyone assumed the perpetrator was the Russian Federation because of the Russian Federation’s war in Ukraine, and because the pipeline carried natural gas from Russia to Europe. But, months have gone by and evidence that Russia was behind the Nord Stream attacks has not surfaced. This was the subject of a lengthy article in the Washington Post, the lead author of which was Shane Harris. Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Shane to discuss the article, what we know about the Nord Stream attacks, and what we know about who could be behind them.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s our annual “Ask Us Anything” episode. This year, Lawfare editors answered some of your burning questions on the Secret Service, the durability of the U.S. legal system in the wake of Jan. 6, the failed German coup, the classification of Mar-a-Lago documents, software supply chain cyber attacks, and the intelligence community using real corporations as covers in their operations.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As Russia's unlawful war of aggression continues to inflict untold devastation on Ukraine, policymakers have begun to search for ways to support Ukraine's beleaguered economy and fund its eventual reconstruction. Their attention has turned to the billions of dollars in assets that the United States has frozen as part of its robust sanctions against the Kremlin. But as policymakers attempt to make some of these assets available to Ukraine, it begs the question: Under what legal authority can the United States seize these Russian frozen assets?Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson and Chimène Keitner, Alfred & Hanna Fromm Professor of International & Comparative Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, wrote a piece for Lawfare titled, “The Legal Challenges Presented by Seizing Frozen Russian Assets,” where they explain the core legal issues that U.S. policymakers need to consider as they weigh whether and how to move forward with seizing any frozen Russian-related assets. Lawfare legal fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Scott to discuss all of this, as well as to get Scott's take on how the U.S. might move forward in its efforts to support Ukraine using Russian assets, notwithstanding, of course, the many legal constraints it faces. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 9, 2020: High profile congressional hearings, like the 2015 Benghazi hearings, the 2019 Mueller Report hearings and most recently, the Ukraine impeachment proceedings are often described in derogatory terms like "political theater," "spectacle" or "circus." But do these exaggerated performances on Capitol Hill actually serve a constitutional purpose? Margaret Taylor sat down with Josh Chafetz, a law professor and author of the book "Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers." They talked about his most recent article, in which he argues that congressional overspeech, like congressional oversight, is actually an important tool of constitutional politics, even if it doesn't automatically produce good outcomes.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For their end-of-the-year episode of Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott took on a number of hard-hitting questions posed by you, the listeners, including:What did Quinta mean when she referenced "the radical political statement" of the Star Wars series Andor?How should we grade Biden as a foreign policy president? Has he made America credible again?Will recent mass shootings make Congress more open to any sort of "domestic terrorism" legislation?What delay tactics did former President Trump use in the courts, and what can be done to stop others from doing the same?Who wins, werewolf or vampire? And how?How would the Afghan Adjustment Act provide legal protections for Afghans who fled the Taliban in the final days of the U.S. military presence? And what is stopping Congress from enacting it?Why has the United States let Turkey bully Stockholm and Helsinki over NATO membership? How can we get Americans to care about foreign policy? Which Muppet does each host identify with most strongly and why?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 11, 2021: On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, the Lawfare Podcast’s miniseries on disinformation and misinformation, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Genevieve Lakier, an assistant professor at the University of Chicago Law School and First Amendment expert. It’s basically impossible to have a conversation about content moderation without someone crying “First Amendment!” at some point. But the cultural conception of the First Amendment doesn’t always match the legal conception. Evelyn and Quinta spoke with Genevieve about what First Amendment doctrine actually says, how its history might be quite different from what you think and what the dynamism of the doctrine over time—and the current composition of the Supreme Court—might suggest about the First Amendment’s possible futures for grappling with the internet.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 31, 2021: Alvaro Marañon sat down with Erik Larson, a computer scientist, tech entrepreneur and author of the new book, "The Myth of Artificial Intelligence: Why Computers Can't Think the Way We Do." They talked about his background and expertise with artificial intelligence, what shaped our modern perception of AI and why the next big break in AI always appears to be 10 or 20 years away. They also discussed the current limitations of artificial intelligence, whether there are any dangers to our current approach and whether AI's advancement to super intelligence is really inevitable.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On December 15, the New York Times published an article that detailed an investigation conducted by three of its reporters into how Russian state media uses American right wing and Chinese media to portray the ongoing war in Ukraine to Russian citizens. The investigation utilized thousands of leaked emails from correspondence within a Russian state media agency and with Russian security services, to uncover how the Kremlin crafts its narratives and spreads disinformation to its people. To unpack the findings of the investigation and their implications, Lawfare associate editor Katherine Pompilio sat down with the journalists that conducted the investigation: Paul Mozur, a New York Times correspondent focused on technology and geopolitics in Asia; Adam Satariano, a New York Times technology correspondent focused on digital policy; and Aaron Krolik, an interactive news journalist and developer also at the Times. They discussed how they conducted their investigation, Russia's propaganda machine that they describe as the country's greatest wartime success, the limits of the disinformation campaign, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the last few weeks, over a dozen U.S. states have banned TikTok from government devices, citing national security concerns. A similar bill was included in the omnibus spending bill, requiring the social media video app to be removed from the devices used by federal agencies. But addressing the concerns over how the Chinese government could coerce TikTok’s parent company to get access to Americans' data raises interesting questions about the existing data protection and privacy frameworks in the U.S.To discuss what is going on, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Caitlin Chin, a fellow with the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who has been closely following these developments. They discussed why TikTok is considered a national security threat to the United States, why a ban might not be the right solution to this problem, and her recommendations for what a comprehensive data protection framework should look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Founded in 2019, Rebellion Defense emerged as a darling of the defense startup industry, backed by powerful Pentagon insiders and high-profile investors like former Google CEO Eric Schmidt. But now, three years later, the company is beginning to look less like Apple and more like Theranos, according to a recent story in Vox. Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Vox senior foreign policy writer Jonathan Guyer to discuss his reporting on Rebellion Defense. They talked about the thorny ethical questions of artificial intelligence on the battlefield, the unholy alliance of Silicon Valley and the Pentagon, and why one former Rebellion Defense employee likened the company to a “Fyre Festival led by Jar Jar Binks.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 23, 2021: Our constitutional system involves the written document, plus two and a half centuries of judicial decisions interpreting it. But these two things only scratch the surface. It also involves our constitutional norms, the unwritten rules that govern how actors in our political system behave. For decades, commentators have observed the steady erosion of many of these norms, and in the four years of the Trump administration, the trickle of norm violations became a torrent. As a response, many in academia, the media and politics have called for Congress to pass legislation that would codify what had previously been unwritten norms of behavior, from requiring that presidential candidates disclose their tax returns to limiting the president's pardon power.In a forthcoming article in the Georgetown Law Journal, Jonathan Gould, assistant professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley, analyzes many of these proposals and points out the potential unintended consequences of trying to commit unwritten norms to legislative language. Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Jonathan about the importance and erosion of constitutional norms, especially within the executive branch, and how best to repair them.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Donald Trump is trying to do something rare—very rare—in American history: lose a presidential election, run again, and get elected to a second term. Only one president, the underappreciated Grover Cleveland, has ever accomplished that feat. Yet his story remains largely unknown.David Priess invited Troy Senik, author of a new biography of Grover Cleveland called, “A Man of Iron: The Turbulent Life and Improbable Presidency of Grover Cleveland,” to Chatter to explore how the stories of rejected presidents in the past shed light on Trump's effort to retake the Oval Office now—with a whole lotta Grover in the conversation.They discussed how we rate U.S. leaders, the cases of presidents who lost their reelection bids and then tried again, what drove those men to do so, Grover Cleveland's formative experiences, his political offices in New York, how he became president, his predilection for vetoes, his loss in 1888, his comeback in 1892, why Cleveland is largely forgotten, how our views of presidents change over time, how Cleveland's effort in 1892 to regain the presidency compares to Trump's attempt now, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Jan. 6 committee issued its final report Thursday night, and the team at Lawfare spent Friday reading through it and formulating some initial thoughts, observations, bewilderments, and questions. To give you an overview and some analysis, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett, and Lawfare senior editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, Molly Reynolds, and Roger Parloff. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past few weeks, Congress has slowly brought two of its biggest pieces of annual omnibus legislation to the finish line: the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, and the Consolidated Appropriations Act. Both annual endeavors play central complementary roles in our political system and often become vehicles for an array of otherwise unrelated provisions, including many related to national security. And even by the usual standards of Congress, this year's process has been a chaotic one.To discuss, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with fellow Lawfare senior editor and Brookings Institution colleague Molly Reynolds. They talked about the process that led to this year's bills and highlighted some notable items that are in them— and some notable items that aren't.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Fifth generation, or 5G technology, promises to bring high-speed, low-latency wireless infrastructure necessary for the smart era. But moving from the promise of 5G to a reality where 5G networks will deliver amazing and important new capabilities and services will require those networks to be secure. To talk about 5G cybersecurity challenges, Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Tom Wheeler, visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (or FCC), and Admiral (ret.) David Simpson, professor at Virginia Tech and former chief of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau at the FCC. They just published a new paper entitled, “5G is Smart, Now Let’s Make it Secure.” They talked about the 5G cyber paradox, three specific cybersecurity challenges they outline in the paper, and recommendations they make for addressing these cybersecurity challenges going forward.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Monday afternoon, the House Select Committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the United States Capitol, better known as the Jan. 6 committee, held its final public event. It summarized its key findings and voted to approve its final report. And as most commentators are focusing on, the committee also voted to recommend to the Department of Justice that it charge Donald Trump and others with crimes. Shortly after the event concluded, the committee released the executive summary of its final report. To talk through it all, Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down for a live event with Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic, Roger Parloff, Molly Reynolds, and Alan Rozenshtein, as well as editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On December 7, Peruvian president Pedro Castillo attempted to dissolve Peru’s Congress and implement a state of emergency. His dictatorship lasted only a few hours before he was impeached by Congress and arrested—making him the fifth president to leave office in Peru in five years. Since Castillo’s arrest, Peru’s crisis has spiraled further, with protests in the streets and a violent response by the police and military that has left 25 people dead. To understand what’s going on right now in Peru, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Rodrigo Barrenechea, a 2022/23 Santo Domingo Visiting Scholar at the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University and an assistant professor at the Departamento de Ciencias Sociales of the Universidad Católica del Uruguay. They talked about how and why Peru ended up here, the fragile state of the country’s democracy, and why Rodrigo thinks that Castillo’s attempted dissolution of Congress was “the most ill-planned coup d’etat in Latin American history.”You can read Rodrigo’s article on the crisis in the Peruvian newspaper El Comercio (in Spanish) here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When we think about government surveillance, we often imagine something physical, like a police officer executing a search warrant on a house or car. But increasingly, government surveillance, including the everyday work of police departments across the country, involves remote electronic monitoring or the analysis of massive amounts of digital information.A leading analyst of this transformation and of the implications it has for our privacy and security is Chris Slobogin, a professor at Vanderbilt Law School and one of the leading scholars of the digital Fourth Amendment. Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein sat down with Chris to discuss his new book, “Virtual Searches: Regulating the Covert World of Technological Policing,” in which Chris explains how the traditional legal framework for surveillance is out of date and what should take its place. Alan and Chris talk about the importance of taking a more flexible approach to what makes a search reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and why it's so important for legislatures to pre-authorize any police surveillance techniques. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ronald Reagan stands among the most consequential national security presidents in United States history, not least of which because his policies helped to end the Cold War without a direct war between the superpowers. Reagan's vision for ending the Cold War evolved during his presidency, but followed clear principles he brought with him to the office.Will Inboden, a historian and former policymaker who leads the Clements Center for National Security at the University of Texas at Austin, has written a new survey of the 40th president's national security policies, “The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink.” In it, he uses newly declassified documents and policymaker interviews to give an informative and insightful reassessment of the formation, development, execution, and impact of Reagan's foreign policy.In this episode of Chatter, David Priess and Inboden touch on the challenges of conducting research on decades-old administrations, the National Security Council process under different presidents, Reagan's influence on an entire generation, the origins of Reagan's national security views, the impact of the 1981 assassination attempt, the nature and influence of Reagan's faith, his evolving relationship with Soviet leaders, the Reykjavik summit, how close the US and USSR came to agreeing to eliminate nuclear weapons, Reagan's legacy beyond the Cold War, what Will would ask Reagan if he had the chance to do so, how Reagan might view the United States today, why Reagan is hard to capture onscreen, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 30, 2020: On Sunday, September 27, the New York Times dropped bombshell new reporting on nearly two decades of Donald Trump's tax return data. The story has attracted enormous attention and paints a dismal picture. Donald Trump paid no personal income taxes for 11 of the past 18 years, he uses tax deductions aggressively, and last year he paid only $750 in federal income tax. So, is this a story of a president merely in massive debt, or is there something more sinister at play? To whom does the president owe all this money? And what are the national security risks of the president being in this sort of financial position? To try to break it all down, Susan Hennessey sat down with Margaret Taylor, formerly a fellow at Brookings and senior editor at Lawfare; Daniel Drezner, a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and the author of "The Toddler in Chief: What Donald Trump Teaches Us about the Modern Presidency"; and Adam Davidson, a contributing writer to The New Yorker who has written extensively on Trump's financial entanglements.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ralph Bunche, one of the most prominent Black Americans of the 20th century, was a legendary diplomat, who from his perch at the United Nations was a central player in the decolonization movement after World War II. To discuss Bunche and his accomplishments, Lawfare founding editor and Harvard Law professor Jack Goldsmith sat down with Kal Raustiala, the Promise Institute Distinguished Professor of Comparative and International Law at UCLA Law School, about his new book, “The Absolutely Indispensable Man: Ralph Bunche, the United Nations, and the Fight to End Empire.” They discussed the role played by Bunche and the United Nations in the decolonization movement, what made Bunche such a great diplomat, Bunche’s view of the relationship between empire and domestic racial segregation, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On November 19, Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk announced that he would be reinstating former President Donald Trump’s account on the platform—though so far, Trump hasn’t taken Musk up on the offer, preferring instead to stay on his bespoke website Truth Social. Meanwhile, Meta’s Oversight Board has set a January 2023 deadline for the platform to decide whether or not to return Trump to Facebook following his suspension after the Jan. 6 insurrection. How should we think through the difficult question of how social media platforms should handle the presence of a political leader who delights in spreading falsehoods and ginning up violence?Luckily for us, Stanford and UCLA recently held a conference on just that. On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the online information ecosystem, Lawfare senior editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic sat down with the conference’s organizers, election law experts Rick Hasen and Nate Persily, to talk about whether Trump should be returned to social media. They debated the tangled issues of Trump’s deplatforming and replatforming … and discussed whether, and when, Trump will break the seal and start tweeting again.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, Apple made an announcement about some new security features it would be offering to users. One of those features involves users' ability to opt in to encryption for iPhone backups to iCloud. While this new feature will enhance data privacy and security for those users who choose to opt in, it may create additional challenges for law enforcement to obtain evidence in criminal investigations.To discuss the implications and potential impact of this new security feature, Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Riana Pfefferkorn, research scholar at the Stanford Internet Observatory. They discussed the costs and benefits to users who may choose to opt in to this feature, how Apple's choice to offer this feature plays into a broader conflict known as the Crypto Wars, and how this feature relates to another part of Apple's announcement where it indicated that it would not be scanning all iPhones for child sexual abuse material before images were backed up to iCloud.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Monday, the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case United States v Fischer—one of the most important cases we've seen in a while relating to criminal prosecutions for the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. The case is about a previously obscure statute, at least in this context, that criminalizes corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding, and it’s a charge that DOJ has brought against hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters. Lawfare legal fellow Saraphin Dhanani attended the argument, and Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with her to discuss what the parties argued, how the judges responded, and what might happen to the charge of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen shared a trove of internal company documents to the Wall Street Journal in 2021, some of the most dramatic revelations concerned the company’s use of a so-called “cross-check” system that, according to the Journal, essentially exempted certain high-profile users from the platform’s usual rules. After the Journal published its report, Facebook—which has since changed its name to Meta—asked the platform’s independent Oversight Board to weigh in on the program. And now, a year later, the Board has finally released its opinion. On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the online information ecosystem, Lawfare senior editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic sat down with Suzanne Nossel, a member of the Oversight Board and the CEO of PEN America. She talked us through the Board’s findings, its criticisms of cross-check, and its recommendations for Meta going forward. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security 2.0, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were reunited after a few weeks apart to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is Still Guilty of Seditious Conspiracy.” The jury in the Oath Keepers trial came back last week, convicting every defendant of at least one criminal offense—including the controversial charge of seditious conspiracy. What might this mean for other Jan. 6 investigations moving forward?“Morality? Puh-leeze.” Weeks of protests in Iran finally seemed to bear fruit last week when a regime official signaled that the morality police may be disbanded and laws requiring that women wear hijabs be repealed. But other regime figures don’t seem on-board with that solution. Is this a sign that protests are succeeding? Where might they go from here?“Les Fleurs du MAL.” The litigation that led Judge Aileen Cannon to appoint a special master to review evidence collected by the FBI from former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate this past summer has finally culminated in its final form: an 11th Circuit ruling reversing Judge Cannon’s order and disbanding the process altogether. Where will the investigation go from here?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 14, 2021: A lot of people are expressing anxiety about white supremacist violent terrorism, yet in a new Brookings paper entitled "Identifying and Exploiting the Weaknesses of the White Supremacist Movement," Daniel Byman, Lawfare's foreign policy editor and a senior fellow at the Brookings Center for Middle East Policy, and Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow at the Center on Extremism at the Anti-Defamation League, say that while the threat is real, these movements have weaknesses that other terrorist groups do not. Benjamin Wittes sat down with Byman and Pitcavage to talk about these weaknesses, how white supremacist groups are vulnerable and how law enforcement in the United States can exploit them to reduce the threat.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday heard oral arguments in the case of Blassingame v. Trump, an appeal from a civil lawsuit against the former president over Jan. 6. The question before the appeals court is: Does a president have immunity from lawsuit even when he's accused of stirring up a mob against a coordinate branch of government engaged in a function constitutionally entrusted to it? The judges seemed skeptical of the former president's argument, which was a bit of a surprise given the composition of the panel. To chew it all over, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare senior editor and University of Minnesota Law School professor Alan Rozenshtein, who followed the oral arguments and live tweeted them. They talked about the case that gave rise to the arguments, how it played out at the lower court, and what the Supreme Court might do when it confronts this question down the road.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in what may be the biggest case of the term: Moore v. Harper. In that case, North Carolina’s state legislature is arguing that the state Supreme Court lacks the legal authority to review the heavily gerrymandered congressional districts it has enacted, on the grounds that the Constitution's elections clause gives that authority exclusively to the state legislatures—an argument often referred to as the independent state legislature doctrine, which many fear may undermine state law election protections around the country if taken up by the Court.To discuss, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down on Twitter Spaces with Professor Ned Foley of The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, and Professor Derek Muller of the University of Iowa College of Law. They discussed where the justices seem to be leaning, how they may resolve different aspects of the party's arguments, and what it all might mean for 2024.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this fall, the Biden administration released what it called a “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights,” a policy document that lays out a five-pillar strategy for how the United States intends to wrestle with and regulate the challenges arising from the increasingly common use of artificial intelligence. In recent weeks, the European Union has been wrestling with its own AI regulation challenges and is now on the verge of releasing its own similar strategy. Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Alex Engler, a fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, who has been closely tracking these policies. They talked about the challenges AI poses to policymakers, the strategy the United States is set to pursue, and how it is both different from and similar to the EU’s approach.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

J. Edgar Hoover served as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for 48 years, from 1924 until 1972. Since his death, Hoover has become one of the most reviled figures in American history due to FBI operations under his leadership to spy on Americans, including government officials, in order to manipulate democratic politics.To discuss Hoover's extraordinary role in American politics in the 20th century and the continuing influence of his legacy today, Lawfare co-founder and Harvard Law professor Jack Goldsmith sat down with Yale University history professor Beverly Gage, who is the author of a new biography of Hoover called, “G-Man: J. Edgar Hoover and the Making of the American Century.” They discussed why Hoover's place in American history is much more complex than conventional wisdom suggests; Hoover as a master bureaucrat who managed the press, Hollywood, and senior government officials to maintain enormous popularity throughout his reign as FBI director; how Hoover, the fierce anti-communist, was the key to the elimination of McCarthyism in the 1950s; and much, much more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Thursday afternoon, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in the amusingly captioned case Trump v. United States of America. The three-judge panel vacated District Judge Aileen Cannon's order appointing a special master to review the material seized at Mar-a-Lago by the Justice Department, and it ruled in scathing language that she had no authority to entertain the case at all To go over it all, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down before a live audience on Twitter Spaces with Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett and Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson. They went through the decision page-by-page and talked about whether things would speed up now that Judge Cannon's ruling is out of the way and what kind of message the 11th Circuit is sending to a new judge who seemed to be willfully intervening on the part of the ex-president.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Plagues periodically exact a heavy toll on human life—and much more. They devastate economies, exacerbate social disorder, shock governance systems, provide fodder for political violence, and interact in surprising ways with terrorism.In this episode of Chatter, David Priess and longtime RAND Corporation terrorism expert Brian Michael Jenkins talk about the long nature of pandemics, the history of public resistance to efforts to protect public health, links between plagues and social unrest, how the concept of comorbidity applies to the effects of pandemics, the relationship between plagues and political violence, the challenges of rumors and rapid communication, the threat of biological terrorism, and pragmatic ways to counter domestic political violence.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 28, 2020: Sophia Yan, a correspondent for the London Telegraph, joined Benjamin Wittes from Beijing where she is in coronavirus lockdown after traveling to Wuhan, China, to see how it was recovering from being the coronavirus epidemic center earlier in the year. They talked about what Wuhan looks like these days, what quarantine means in China, and how close the surveillance is. And they talked about the Chinese government, how it is responding to the crisis, and about how the Chinese economy is recovering and suffering.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

U.S. Cyber Command was established on May 21, 2010, and is the second youngest unified combatant command after U.S. Space Command in the United States. As explained in the Command history, U.S. Cyber Command operates globally in real time against determined and capable adversaries. Lawyers who work in the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate at Cyber Command provide legal advice on a range of issues, including the legality of offensive cyber operations. Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Kurt Sanger, a recently retired Cyber Command lawyer, to discuss the kind of work he did and issues he addressed at U.S. Cyber Command. They talked about why the application of international law can be challenging in the cyber domain, some of the most vexing international legal issues with respect to offensive cyber operations, and some legal issues he is observing in the context of the current armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Protests have broken out in China over the zero-Covid policy, over lockdowns, and even over the rule of newly appointed third-term leader Xi Jinping. The government has begun a crackdown, there have been arrests, there have been intimidating interrogations, there have been street closures, and there has been a lot of internet content removed. To go over it all and see what we can make of it, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Sophia Yan, who just left China where she has been The Telegraph’s correspondent for a number of years. They talked about whether these protests might have legs, about what capacity the government has to shut them down, and about whether this could be the beginning of something.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The 2002 Iraq AUMF authorized the invasion of Iraq and a variety of U.S. military activities since then, and a large bipartisan group of senators and representatives have decided it's time for it to go away. A repeal bill was passed by the House and is awaiting action in the Senate, but we don't know if there's going to be time for that action before the Senate adjourns. It’s a good opportunity to have a conversation about this orphaned AUMF that just keeps on going like the Energizer Bunny through the decades. To talk through the history of the 2002 AUMF, its surprising rebirth, and its dangerous continued life, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson, who recently wrote a two-part series on the subject for Lawfare, focusing on the history and practice of the 2002 AUMF, as well as its interpretations and implications.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States military was one of the first institutions in government to acknowledge the threat posed by climate change, as well as the science behind it, and yet it remains the largest single energy consumer in the country and the largest institutional greenhouse gas emitter in the world. To talk through this strategic disconnect, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Dr. Neta Crawford, Montague Burton Chair in International Relations at the University of Oxford, co-director of the Costs of War study at Brown University, and author of the new book, “The Pentagon, Climate Change, and War: Charting the Rise and Fall of U.S. Military Emissions.” They discussed what Dr. Crawford calls the irony and tragedy of the military's carbon emissions, how war drives emissions and industrialization, and why climate activists may be skeptical about framing climate as a security issue. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been an eventful several weeks on the Korean Peninsula, with a spree of missile tests, the sudden display of a daughter of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and the articulation of a remarkably aggressive nuclear doctrine. To go over it all, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Stephan Haggard, the Lawrence and Sallye Krause Professor of Korea-Pacific Studies at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at the University of California San Diego. They talked about how all of this relates to prior diplomacy between North Korea and the Trump administration, what message the North Koreans are trying to send with the combination of this testing and the articulation of this new doctrine, and whether there is any prospect of denuclearization at any time in the foreseeable future.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security 2.0, a Quinta-less Alan and Scott welcomed Lawfare's dynamic associate editor duo, Katherine Pompilio and Hyemin Han, on to the show to talk through the week's big national security news stories, including:“Going Full Cleve.” Last week, former President Donald Trump announced his intention to once again run for president—in spite of the Republicans’ weak showing in the midterm elections and his own impending legal troubles. What does Trump’s announcement mean for 2024 and after? “A Mueller Mulligan?” Trump’s announcement that he was once again running for president in turn led Attorney General Merrick Garland to make his own announcement last Friday: that he was appointing another Special Counsel to take over the investigations into Trump’s interference in the 2020 election results and mishandling of classified records. Was this the right move? How will the Special Counsel’s appointment impact the investigations—and Trump’s political future?“Pyongyanking Our Chain.” North Korea has launched a new ICBM that it claims can deliver nuclear weapons anywhere in the United States. Should this threat be taken seriously or is it a bluff? And is the Biden administration doing enough to respond?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 30, 2021: Anti-Asian violence in the United States seems to be on the rise. On March 16, a shooter killed eight people, six of whom were Asian women, at several Atlanta businesses. Across the country, Asian-Americans have shared stories of attacks and harassment, some of which involved racist language in connection with the coronavirus pandemic.Yet there is very little data available that could help journalists and policymakers make sense of this apparent trend. To understand why, Quinta Jurecic spoke with Jeff Asher, a crime analyst and the co-founder of AH Datalytics, who recently wrote for Lawfare on why there’s so little reliable data on anti-Asian violence—or on any other kind of hate crime. Jeff discussed the patchwork system by which the FBI currently collects data on hate crimes, what other factors might explain why the data is so unreliable and how improved data could help guide the response to anti-Asian attacks.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 2, 2020: Most of us don’t think of United States history as an imperial history, but the facts are there. The law and policy surrounding westward expansion, off-continent acquisitions, and a worldwide network of hundreds of bases reveal much about how and why the United States grew as it did.Last month, David Priess spoke with Daniel Immerwahr, associate professor of history at Northwestern University and author of “How to Hide an Empire.” They talked about everything from what the Constitution says about lands west of the thirteen colonies, to the critical role of the Guano Islands in U.S. history, to the famous Insular Cases, to how military access agreements and long-term leases help the United States avoid a truly territorial empire.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 11, 2020: This week, the Supreme Court returned once again to the complex and sometimes controversial Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, or FSIA, that protects foreign sovereigns from litigation before U.S. courts. At the same time, Congress is once again debating new exceptions to the protections provided by the FSIA on issues ranging from cybercrime to the coronavirus pandemic, an effort that may risk violating international law and exposing the United States to similar lawsuits overseas. To discuss these developments and where they may be headed, Scott R. Anderson sat down with two leading scholars on sovereign immunity issues: Chimène Keitner, a professor at the UC Hastings School of Law and a former counselor on international law at the U.S. State Department, and Ingrid Wuerth, a professor at Vanderbilt University Law School and one of the reporters for the American Law Institute's Fourth Restatement on U.S. foreign relations law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the last 29 days, Roger Parloff, Lawfare senior editor, has been sitting in on the Oath Keeper trial in Washington. The trial is now done, the jury has the case, and Roger joined Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about it. Which charges are likely to stick, and which ones seem weak? How did the various defendants do when they took the stand to defend themselves? And what kind of verdict do we expect when the jury eventually comes back?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this month, officials from the government of Ethiopia and representatives from the Tigray People's Liberation Front agreed to halt the two-year conflict that has been rife with accusations of ethnic cleansing, sexual violence, and famine as a weapon of war. To discuss the current state of the conflict and the prospect of peace, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Alex de Waal, executive director of the World Peace Foundation and a research professor at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. A longtime expert on the Horn of Africa, de Waal co-edited the book, “Accountability for Mass Starvation: Testing the Limits of the Law,” which was published in August. They discussed the terms of the recent truce agreements, the irony of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's Nobel Peace Prize, and the options for accountability for forced starvation and other crimes committed by both sides. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the weekend, the United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP 27, went into overtime as nations came to an historic agreement to establish a loss and damage fund. This fund is meant to give resources to countries who have experienced the worst effects of climate change. Some like to think of it as climate reparations. There are a lot of factors that might have created the momentum for this historic agreement to go through after many years. An interesting one is that it's becoming more and more difficult for big emitters like the United States to deny their role in contributing to climate change, particularly as new scientific studies have been pivotal in creating a pretty unimpeachable basis for climate responsibility. But, just because science can verify certain realities does not mean that it's a straight path forward for climate justice. To get a sense of what factors are coming together to achieve climate justice, Lawfare associate editor Hyemin Han merges the legal and policy perspective with the science perspective in a conversation with Karen Sokol, a professor at the Loyola University New Orleans College of Law and a fellow at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, and Chris Callahan, a PhD candidate at Dartmouth College who co-produced a scientific study that informed negotiations on loss and damage at COP 27.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Satellites have held a special place in military planning and in spy fiction alike for more than half a century. Both domains ended up devoting much attention to satellite-based weapons and anti-satellite weaponry; both have also dealt with the problem of space debris related to the latter.In this chat, David Priess and George Washington University historian Aaron Bateman talk about Bateman's early interest in satellites, early satellite technology and attempts at anti-satellite activity, the Outer Space Treaty and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, actions by presidents from Eisenhower through Biden related to the testing of satellite and/or anti-satellite weapons, the Strategic Defense Initiative (commonly called the "Star Wars program"), the problem of space debris, the Kessler Syndrome, other countries' satellite and anti-satellite activities, the Space Force, and on-screen portrayals of satellite warfare and space debris from the James Bond movies to Gravity.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 23, 2017: The escalating tension between North Korea and the United States has risen to an unprecedented level. Earlier this month, Stephan Haggard, Lawrence and Sallye Krause Professor of Korea-Pacific Studies at UC San Diego, gave a lecture at a private function on the complicated strategic and political risks that North Korea’s missile and nuclear capabilities present. He talked about the complex relationship among North Korea’s allies and adversaries, the impact of sanctions against Pyongyang, and the past and future role of the United States in addressing North Korean aggression.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier today, in a surprise announcement, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to lead two ongoing federal investigations of former president and now official 2024 presidential candidate Donald Trump. The special counsel, Jack Smith, is a longtime DOJ prosecutor and currently the chief Kosovo war crimes prosecutor in The Hague. He will take over the investigation into the retention of classified and government documents at Mar-a-lago, as well as the investigation into attempts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power after the 2020 election.To make sense of the special counsel appointment and what it means for the federal investigations into Donald Trump, Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Lawfare editor-in-chief Ben Wittes, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic, and former FBI agent Peter Strzok, who worked on Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into foreign election interference in the 2016 election.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today, the U.S. military maintains around 800 bases in installations around the world with around 75 of those in Latin America, including perhaps its most notorious in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But it wasn't always this way.To learn more about this fraught and understudied history, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Dr. Rebecca Herman, assistant professor of history at UC Berkeley, to discuss her new book, “Cooperating with the Colossus: A Social and Political History of US Military Bases in World War II Latin America.” They discussed how the U.S. went from its good neighbor policy of the 1930s to nearly 200 military bases on sovereign Latin American soil by the end of the war, and the thorny questions of legal jurisdiction, labor rights, and gender relations that arose from those new sites. They also got into how, in Prof. Herman's words, although national sovereignty and international cooperation are compatible concepts in principle, they're difficult to reconcile in practice. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

American democracy might look healthier in light of last week's midterms, but there's still a lot of skepticism across the political spectrum about how it's doing. From the right, would-be authoritarians cast doubt on elections and on the very idea of liberal democracy. But even those who reject this authoritarian impulse are frequently uncomfortable with the messiness of democratic politics, instead preferring an anti-politics of technocratic decision-making. Jedediah Purdy, a law professor at Duke Law School, wants to defend democracy from its critics and its skeptics. In his new book, “Two Cheers for Politics: Why Democracy Is Flawed, Frightening—and Our Best Hope,” he argues that democratic renewal is both desirable and, most importantly, possible. Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein sat down with Jed to talk about the book, get his thoughts about the state of American democracy, and chart the path toward a healthier democratic future.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Matt Tait is a cybersecurity expert who has worked both in the private sector and for the British government at GCHQ, the UK's intelligence, security, and cyber agency. He's also a Lawfare contributor. Like a lot of us, Tait has spent the last several months thinking about Ukraine, and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes had cybersecurity questions for him. They talked about why the Ukrainian internet is still functioning and why the Russians have been so ineffective in the cyber arena. They also talked about whether U.S. support for Ukraine is threatened with Republicans in control of the House and what the Biden administration is going to do about Section 702, which is scheduled to expire at the end of next year.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sophia Yan, pianist for the Lawfare Podcast and Rational Security, is also The Telegraph’s Beijing correspondent—or at least, she was until the other day. She’s produced a new podcast entitled, “How to become a dictator,” about the rise and rule of Xi Jinping and her own struggles as a reporter in Xi’s China. Now Sophia’s in Taiwan after a hasty exit from the country, and she joined Lawfare’s editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes to discuss the new podcast and her departure from China. Who is Xi Jinping really? How is Xi different from other recent Chinese leaders? Why did Sophia leave China? And did she take her piano with her?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Georgii Dubynskyi is the Deputy Minister of Digital Transformation of Ukraine. It is a ministry set up to modernize government services for Ukrainians that has taken a lead role in keeping Ukraine functioning online during the war. On Thursday morning, he joined Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes before a live audience at the Hewlett Foundation's cybersecurity grantee convening conference in Los Angeles.It was a wide-ranging conversation that started with what the ministry was meant to do and what role it has taken on during the war. How has Ukraine remained so resilient amidst Russian kinetic and cyber attacks? Why have the Russian cyberattacks been less effective than we expected them to be? And why is the Ukrainian internet still up when so much of the power is down.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Brookings Institution Middle East expert Natan Sachs to talk over the week's big (non-U.S. election) national security news, including:“Bibi Got Back.” Last week, an unprecedented fifth national election in the last four years returned controversial former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to power, at the head of a coalition including several far-right nationalist parties. What does his return to office mean for the future of Israel and the region? And its relations with the United States?“COP Out.” The United Nations’ 27th annual Convention of Parties (also known as “COP27”) is playing host to world leaders in Sharm-al-Sheikh, Egypt, this week, where some are hoping to find new consensus on how to combat climate change. Are countries taking these challenges seriously? What are these efforts likely to look like moving forward?“Everybody Toots.” Elon Musk’s purchase and dramatic reorientation of Twitter is begging to drive users to other social media platforms, including the decentralized Mastodon network. What will Musk’s changes mean for the future of disinformation and content moderation, both within Twitter and outside of it?For object lessons, Alan endorsed hunting the world's most dangerous game: man (with paintballs). Quinta passed along a useful reference on the state of crime in the United States and the way it is being used in the midterm elections. Scott recommended everyone try a sip of his long neglected workplace colleague. And Natan celebrated the pandemic perseverance of his office jade plants as a sign of hope in dark times.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 23, 2020: Bobby Chesney sat down with former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson and Texas Congressman Chip Roy as part of the 2020 Texas Tribune Festival. They discussed Portland, DHS, domestic violence, and even the shortage of civil discourse in our society.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Due to the Veterans Day holiday, our team is taking a break and bringing you a Lawfare Archive episode that we think you’ll find timely given some events from the last few weeks.From April 2, 2020: On this episode of the Arbiters of Truth series on disinformation, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Nate Persily, the James B. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School. Persily is also a member of the Kofi Annan Commission on Democracy and Elections in the Digital Age, which recently released a report on election integrity and the internet for which Nate provided a framing paper. Alongside his work on internet governance, Nate is also an expert on election law and administration. They spoke about the commission report and the challenges the internet may pose for democracy, to what extent the pandemic has flipped that on its head, and, of course, the 2020 presidential election.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Tuesday, November 8, Americans finished casting their ballots in the midterm elections. Given that the president’s party typically performs poorly in the midterms, Democrats were poised for major losses and Republicans were ready to celebrate a “red wave” handing them control of both the House and Senate. But instead, Democrats saw a striking overperformance—and as of Wednesday afternoon, control of both the House and Senate remains up for grabs. Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with fellow senior editors Scott Anderson and Molly Reynolds to talk through what they know and don’t know about the results. Was this a stay of execution for American democracy? If the GOP does take the House by a narrow margin, how hard is it going to be for the messy Republican caucus to stick together? And what do questions over control of Congress mean for the Jan. 6 investigation and key foreign policy issues, like aid to Ukraine?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the summer of 2020, Lawfare’s editor in chief Benjamin Wittes found out that he had been the subject of intelligence reports compiled by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis. It was a bizarre but troubling revelation, and it raised a lot of questions, not only about the propriety of those reports but also about the practice in general. Who else was I&A compiling intelligence reports about and on what basis? So, Ben filed a FOIA request and subsequently a lawsuit in hopes of getting some answers. He's written about this matter for Lawfare a number of times, including in an update published yesterday.Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Ben to talk through it all. They discussed the background of the case, why so-called open source intelligence reports can be so dangerous, and what we've learned about DHS over the course of the litigation.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It’s Election Day in the United States—so while you wait for the results to come in, why not listen to a podcast about the other biggest story obsessing the political commentariat right now? We’re talking, of course, about Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter and the billionaire’s dramatic and erratic changes to the platform. In response to Musk’s takeover, a great number of Twitter users have made the leap to Mastodon, a decentralized platform that offers a very different vision of what social media could look like. What exactly is decentralized social media, and how does it work? Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein has a paper on just that, and he sat down with Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic on the podcast to discuss for an episode of our Arbiters of Truth series on the online information ecosystem. They were also joined by Kate Klonick, associate professor of law at St. John’s University, to hash out the many, many questions about content moderation and the future of the internet sparked by Musk’s reign and the new popularity of Mastodon.Among the works mentioned in this episode:“Welcome to hell, Elon. You break it, you buy it,” by Nilay Patel on The Verge“Hey Elon: Let Me Help You Speed Run The Content Moderation Learning Curve,” by Mike Masnick on TechdirtSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The government has rested its case in chief in the criminal seditious conspiracy trial of Elmer Stewart Rhodes III and several other members of the Oath Keepers. The trial has been going on for the last several weeks, and Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff has been in court every day keeping us up to date.Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Roger to talk through it all. Who has the government put on the stand? What parts of the government's case has it proved, and what parts are a little bit dodgy? What can we expect as the defense presents its case, which began on Thursday? And what do we make of the government’s silence on the question of the Insurrection Act?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Although codemaking and codebreaking often receive less attention in the public imagination than swashbuckling HUMINT operations and ingenious spy gadgets, they have changed history. The under-appreciation of cryptography might stem from a combination of the complexity of encryption, the classified nature of much of its technology, and the difficulty of conveying codebreaking effectively in pop culture.David Priess spoke with Vince Houghton about the realities and fictional representations of cryptography, as well as the challenges and rewards of making a compelling museum experience out of U.S. codemaking and codebreaking efforts. Houghton is director of the National Cryptologic Museum, the open-to-the-public museum of the National Security Agency. They talked while walking through the newly redesigned museum in Annapolis Junction, Maryland, highlighting various artifacts including early American codebreaking computers, German Enigma machines, the oldest known book of cryptography (from the 16th century), and code generators for U.S. nuclear weapons. They discussed the provenance of highly unusual items and the value of having so many of them on display. And they traded views on movies incorporating ciphers or codes, from The Da Vinci Code to Sneakers to The Empire Strikes Back to The Imitation Game.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 8, 2021: If you’re listening to this podcast, the odds are that you’ve heard a lot about QAnon recently—and you might even have read some alarming reporting about how belief in the conspiracy theory is on the rise. But is it really?This week on Arbiters of Truth, the Lawfare Podcast’s miniseries on our online information ecosystem, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Joseph Uscinski, an associate professor of political science at the University of Miami who studies conspiracy theories. He explained why conspiracy theories in America aren’t actually at a new apex, what kinds of people are drawn to ideas like QAnon and what role—if any—social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter should have in limiting the spread of conspiracy theories.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On October 30, Brazilians elected Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva as their next president. Within minutes, world leaders, including President Biden and Secretary Blinken, offered official congratulations. For Lulu supporters, the atmosphere was celebratory but tense, as many wondered if Lulu's opponent, incumbent Jair Bolsonaro—who once said the election would end either in his death, arrest, or victory—would accept the legitimate results of the election. To talk through that election and its aftermath, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Brian Winter, editor in chief of Americas Quarterly and a journalist with over a decade living and reporting across Latin America. They discussed whether warnings of an election crisis were alarmist or not, what's next for Bolsonaro and his movement, and what to watch for during Lulu's first 100 days.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Israeli election results are in—sort of—and the early count looks very favorable for former Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and the far-right coalition that he would bring to power. The results are not a hundred percent clear yet, but they're clear enough for Benjamin Wittes to sit down on Twitter Spaces with Natan Sachs, the director of the Center for Middle East Policy and a senior fellow in the Foreign Policy Program at Brookings, to talk through it all. How did Netanyahu win while getting no more votes than the other side? How did he impose a unity on his side, and how did the other side fail to do so in a fashion that facilitated this? Who is Itamar Ben-Gvir, and why is he the new power source in Israeli politics? And what can we say about the government that is going out—a government that ranged from the hard right to an Islamist party?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, Lawfare published a piece by Lawfare’s legal fellow Saraphin Dhanani called, “The Case for Designating the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Militias as Foreign Terrorist Organizations.” The article considered whether the Russian-backed militias operating in the Ukrainian provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk can be properly designated as FTOs, and whether they should be.Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Saraphin and with Lawfare’s editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes, who has also been giving this topic a lot of thought. They discussed the legal requirements for FTO designation, how such a designation would interact with the existing sanctions regime the United States has imposed in response to Russia's war in Ukraine, and what impact FTO designations might have on the conflict.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In recent weeks, the Biden administration has released a trio of long-awaited strategy documents, including the National Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy, and the Nuclear Posture Review. But how should we read these documents, and what do they actually tell us about how the Biden administration intends to approach the world?To answer these questions, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Richard Fontaine, chief executive officer of the Center for a New American Security, who is himself also a former National Security Council official and senior congressional adviser. They discussed the role these strategy documents play in U.S. foreign policy, what we can learn from them, and what they say about the state of the world and the United States’ role in it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The effect of the digital revolution on privacy has been mixed, to say the least, and for intimate privacy—information about our health, sexual activities, and relationships—it's been a downright disaster. Corporations and governments surveil us, former sexual partners post revenge pornography online, and our virtual reality future threatens to take privacy intrusions to a whole new level. Danielle Citron is a professor at the University of Virginia Law School, a MacArthur Fellow, and the leading law reformer on digital privacy. She's just released a new book, “The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity, and Love in the Digital Age.” Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein sat down with Danielle to talk about her research and advocacy, the dangers that technology and the market pose to intimate privacy, and what we can do to fight back. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by China expert and law professor Julian Ku to talk through some of the week's big national security news, including:“Xi Loves Me, Xi Loves Me Not.” At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th National Congress this past weekend, Chinese President Xi Jinping was able to not only secure his leadership over the party and country for a third consecutive five-year term but successfully staff the party apparatus with his hand-picked loyalists. What does the Congress tell us about where China is headed under Xi’s rule?“Huawei or the Highway.” Less than 24 hours after the close of the CCP Congress in Beijing, Attorney General Merrick Garland and his most senior deputies unveiled a series of indictments against Chinese nationals alleged to have engaged in covert campaigns to interfere with the investigation into Huawei, penetrate U.S. research institutions, and curb protests by Chinese nationals in the United States. Is the timing a message or just a coincidence? How should the Biden administration be responding?“4th and Elon(g).” Despite his best efforts, Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter is set to go through this Friday. But in the last few days, there have been mutterings that the purchase might be subjected to a national security review by the federal government. Are these rumors just Elon’s Hail Mary attempt at killing the deal? Or might they have some merit? And what will either outcome mean for Twitter?For object lessons, Alan recommended the new film "Argentina, 1985." Quinta endorsed the novel "Grey Bees" by Andrey Kurkov for those wanting to sample some modern Ukrainian literature. Scott urged listeners who share his space obsessions to check out "For All Mankind," one of the best shows he's seen on television. And Julian recommended the BBC documentary series "Rome: Empire Without Limit" by Mary Beard for those wanting to reflect a bit on the rise and decline of great powers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From August 24, 2020: In recent months, relations between the United States and China seem to have reached a new low as disagreements over trade, tech, human rights and the coronavirus have led the two sides to exchange increasingly harsh rhetoric. Just weeks ago, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went so far as to suggest that the decades-long experiment of U.S. engagement with China had been a mistake. But is this heightened tension just a bump in the road, or is it a new direction for one of the United States's most important bilateral relationships? To discuss these issues, Scott R. Anderson sat down with an all-star panel of China watchers, including Tarun Chhabra of the Brookings Institution and Georgetown Center for Security and Emerging Technology, Elsa Kania of the Center for a New American Security, and Rob Williams, executive director of the Paul Tsai China Center at Yale Law School.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There's been a lot of discussion about whether Donald Trump should be indicted. Lately, that discussion has focused on the documents the FBI seized from Mar-a-lago or the Jan. 6 committee's revelations about his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. But what about his speech on the ellipse on Jan. 6 when he told a crowd of thousands to “fight like hell,” and they went on to attack the Capitol? Isn't that incitement? Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Alan Rozenshtein, a senior editor at Lawfare and an associate professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, and Jed Shugerman, a professor at Fordham Law School. Alan and Jed explained the complicated First Amendment jurisprudence protecting political speech, even when it leads to violence, and why they believe that given everything we know now, Trump may in fact be criminally liable. They also reference Alan and Jed’s law review article in Constitutional Commentary, “January 6, Ambiguously Inciting Speech, and the Overt-Acts Solution” (forthcoming 2023).Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Claudia Swain is Lawfare’s digital strategist—but before coming to Lawfare, she worked at the Federal Railroad Administration, deep in the bureaucracy. She recently wrote an article for Lawfare called, “The Emerging Cyber Threat to the American Rail Industry,” which is a bit of a chilling read about the threat that the American rail industry faces as a result of, of all things, new computerized safety systems. Benjamin Wittes sat down with Claudia for a fascinating conversation about Positive Train Control, this new computerized system, and the potential cybersecurity threats it poses. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This past weekend, the Chinese Communist Party held its 20th National Congress, an event held every five years at which it appoints its senior leadership who in turn holds the reins of China's government. This year, the event focused on one man, Xi Jinping, the current president of China, who secured an unprecedented, third consecutive five-year term as the party’s senior-most official and was able to staff the party apparatus with hand-chosen loyalists, even at the expense of his predecessors and other factions in the party.To discuss these events, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Sophia Yan, China correspondent for The Telegraph, and Julian Ku, Professor of Law at Hofstra University. They discussed what went down at the National Congress, where it says China is headed in the next five years, and what it might mean for its relationship with the United States.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In two weeks, millions of Americans will head to the polls for the 2022 midterm election. During that time, an estimated one million poll workers will help administer the election and ensure the process runs safely and smoothly.Ahead of the midterms, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Rachel Orey, associate director of the Bipartisan Policy Center Elections Project, and Grace Gordon, a policy analyst on the project, to talk through their latest report, “Fortifying Election Security Through Poll Worker Policy.” They discussed how elections are fundamentally a human enterprise, why poll workers are so important, and how states can better safeguard against efforts to use poll workers to undermine election credibility.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, the George Washington University Program on Extremism published a report called, “Mayhem, Murder, and Misdirection: Violent Extremist Attack Plots Against Critical Infrastructure in the United States.” To talk through that report and a recent Lawfare article on the topic, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Ilana Krill, a research fellow at the Program on Extremism, and Seamus Hughes, the program's deputy director. They discussed the white supremacists and Salafi-jihadists who make up these movements, the encrypted channels through which propaganda and plans are spread, and what's to be done to protect critical infrastructure in the United States.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Olivia Troye has worked in the Republican National Committee, the Pentagon, the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Department of Homeland Security. But it was her role on the small team directly supporting Vice President Mike Pence that brought her the most challenging experiences of her career while making her all too aware of the surprisingly thin staffing for the next in line to the presidency.Lawfare publisher David Priess spoke to Troye about her path from El Paso to Philadelphia to Washington, her experience on Capitol Hill on 9/11, serving in Baghdad after the U.S. invasion, working at the National Counterterrorism Center and the Department of Homeland Security, differences between core National Security Council staff and the support staff for the vice president, the many different tasks that support to a vice president entails, Mike Pence as a customer of the President's Daily Brief, the value of civil service professionals, the ups and downs of working with Pence during the COVID-19 pandemic, the inappropriate handling of classified material she saw during her final years on the job, the ethical reasons spurring her to leave government service, the importance of reasonable gun control, and more.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 5, 2021: Some countries don't just abuse their citizens within their own borders; increasingly, they target individuals after they have gone abroad. A range of nefarious acts play a role here, and together they make up a phenomenon called transnational repression.Nate Schenkkan, the director of research strategy at Freedom House, and Isabel Linzer, Freedom House's research analyst for technology and democracy, are the two authors of "Out of Sight, Not Out of Reach: Understanding Transnational Repression," a new report detailing the practice and Freedom House's research on the topic. David Priess sat down with them to discuss the variety of forms transnational repression can take; whom is targeted and why; examples from the governments of Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, Rwanda, and even Equatorial Guinea; and recommendations to buck this growing trend.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Recently, Charlie Savage of the New York Times reported that the Biden administration had finalized a new policy governing drone strikes used in counterterrorism operations outside war zones. The policy tightens up rules established under the Trump administration—which themselves replaced an earlier guidance set out by President Obama. President Biden’s policy is the latest effort to calibrate America’s use of force in a 21st-century conflict outside the traditional battlefield.To talk through Charlie’s reporting, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with him and Lawfare cofounder Bobby Chesney, who has closely observed this area of U.S. law and policy. They discussed how U.S. counterterrorism operations have changed in recent years, how Biden’s approach compares to the Obama and Trump policies before it, and the significance of these changes for U.S. counterterrorism going forward. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Senior Editor Roger Parloff joins Managing Editor Tyler McBrien for another quick update on the prosecution’s case in the Oath Keepers’ seditious conspiracy trial. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Joe Sullivan, Uber's former chief security officer and a former federal prosecutor, was found guilty of obstruction of justice and misprision of a felony. These charges arose from what the Department of Justice characterized as Sullivan's attempted coverup of a 2016 hack of Uber. The Sullivan case has created some consternation in the cybersecurity community. Kellen Dwyer, partner at the law firm of Alston & Bird, argues in a recent Lawfare piece that the Sullivan prosecution threatens to undermine the positive working relationship between DOJ and the tech sector. Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Kellen to talk about the Sullivan case. They discussed the specific charges for which Sullivan was convicted, how those charges blur the lines between covering up a data incident and merely declining to report it, and how in order to facilitate timely reporting of serious cybersecurity incidents to the FBI, the DOJ should clarify certain aspects of its charging policy to address concerns raised by the Sullivan case.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On October 13, the Jan. 6 committee closed what may be its final public hearing with a dramatic vote: unanimously, the committee members agreed to subpoena former president Donald Trump. So … what happens now? Will Trump actually testify? What happens if he defies the committee—would the Justice Department prosecute him for contempt of Congress? To talk things through, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with fellow senior editors Molly Reynolds and Jonathan Shaub and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes. They discussed the historical precedent for current and former presidents testifying before Congress and debated the likelihood that Trump will take the plunge and show up before the committee. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Fulton County DA Fani Willis is closing in on Donald Trump's 2020 election meddling. She could begin issuing indictments as soon as December, CNN reports. In the meantime, she's gotten testimony from a long list of the former president's allies, and she's sought testimony from even more who are still resisting. All of this has America wondering: what the heck is a special purpose grand jury? Why can't it indict people? And what does it mean for Rudy Giuliani to be a target of a grand jury if it can't even issue any indictments? To talk it over, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare’s Fulton County court reporter Anna Bower, who wrote a Q&A piece entitled, “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Georgia Special Purpose Grand Juries But Were Afraid to Ask.” Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Presidential transitions are the most delicate and hazardous periods in the entire political cycle. Even at the best of times, incoming administrations face a huge task. Each new president must make more than 4,000 political appointments in a short period of time, as well as get up to speed on ongoing policy issues.To discuss the history and the current framework of presidential transitions, Lawfare publisher David Priess sat down with David Marchick, the dean of American University's Kogod School of Business and previously served as the director of the Center for Presidential Transition at the Partnership for Public Service. He also is the author of, “The Peaceful Transfer of Power: An Oral History of America’s Presidential Transitions,” and the host of the Transition Lab podcast. They discussed examples of effective and ineffective recent transitions, the role of everyone from outgoing presidents to the GSA to agency teams, and what else might be done to nail down best practices for presidential transitions.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan Rozenshtein, Quinta Jurecic, and Scott R. Anderson were joined by beloved Lawfare contributor and UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks, fresh from her latest stint at the White House. They hashed through some of the week's big national security news, including:“The Bridge and Pummel Crowd.” Ukraine’s destruction of a symbolic bridge linking Russia to Crimea has observers worried about a new round of escalation, as Russia responded with missile strikes on a range of civilian targets across the country, including a German consulate in Kyiv, with promises of more to come. Are we entering a new, brutal phase of the conflict? What can be done to stop its civilian toll—or to keep the escalatory spiral from spinning out of control?“Finally, Some Decency and Moderation on the Supreme Court.” Last week, the Supreme Court took up not one but two—albeit, two closely related—cases that center on how to apply Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a law that provides internet companies with immunity for liability arising from user-generated content they host and protects their ability to moderate content. What might this judicial scrutiny mean for the future of content moderation on the internet?“1,001 Arabian Slights.” Saudi Arabia’s decision to cut oil production—a move expected to drive up oil prices and slow the global economy, to the benefit of Russia and other producers—has some members of Congress up in arms. This is especially true as it came on the end of a summer visit by President Biden that controversially seemed to signal a willingness to thaw relations with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, which have grown icy since his involvement in the 2018 killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. What do these steps mean for the future of the U.S.-Saudi relationship?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 24, 2022: It's been a big week for the seditious conspiracy statute, which has long been on the books, quietly forbidding violent interference with the lawful functions of the United States government. But on 60 Minutes this weekend, the former chief prosecutor supervising the January 6 investigation hinted not too subtly that the seditious conspiracy statute might come out of obscurity and enter into action. Benjamin Wittes sat down with Jacob Schulz, Lawfare's deputy managing editor who has written a series of articles for Lawfare on recent deployments of the seditious conspiracy statute, to talk through the law's recent enforcement history.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Senior Editor Roger Parloff joins Ben Wittes for another quick update on the prosecution’s case in the Oath Keepers’ seditious conspiracy trial.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thursday was the final day of hearings for the Jan. 6 select committee, and it turned out to be a bit of a barn burner, with a lot of new information about Donald Trump's state of mind, about the secret service, and about people with weapons threatening violence.To chew it all over, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down on Twitter Spaces with Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic, Alan Rozenshtein, and Molly Reynolds. They talked through what we learned on Thursday, what the subpoena of Donald Trump is going to mean, what the effects on the midterm elections are likely to be, and how the committee has done given the constraints it faced.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court has granted cert in two cases exploring the interactions between anti-terrorism laws and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. To discuss the cases, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down on Arbiters of Truth, our occasional series on the online information ecosystem, with Lawfare senior editors and Rational Security co-hosts Quinta Jurecic, Alan Rozenshtein, and Scott R. Anderson. They discussed the state of 230 law, what the Supreme Court has taken on, what the lower court did, and if there is a right answer here and what it might look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Foreign-imposed regime change is a policy tool that a number of countries—most frequently the United States—have used to establish friendly regimes and align interests in regions around the world. With the ongoing unrest in Iran and the war in Ukraine, foreign-imposed regime change is in the news once again.But conversations around foreign-imposed regime change often occur without reference to the whole historical record. Hindsight might suggest that foreign-imposed regime change can be done but that it just needs to be done better, that we just need more resources or better strategy. To evaluate the efficacy of foreign-imposed regime change in a systematic way, Lawfare associate editor Hyemin Han spoke with Alexander Downes, professor of political science and international affairs at The George Washington University, who wrote a book about it called “Catastrophic Success: Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Goes Wrong.” With his data set, he draws out the lessons we can learn from attempts of foreign-imposed regime change over time. Ultimately, he argues that even when foreign-imposed regime change works, its successes don't last very long, and the downsides of regime change are actually built into the process of trying to achieve it in the first place.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the illegal annexation of the Ukrainian region of Kherson, along with others. In the months leading up to the sham referendum that solidified the annexation, the Kremlin launched a forced assimilation campaign that targeted nearly every aspect of daily life in Kherson. Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Belén Carrasco Rodríguez and Tom Southern of the Centre for Information Resilience to talk through their research into the means used to establish and strengthen Russian occupational rule over the seized territories. They discussed this Russian playbook for control and the ways that forced assimilation may be working or not.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From May 25, 2018: Vladimir Milov is the current economic advisor to Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, and the former deputy minister of energy in the Russian government. This week, Milov spoke to Alina Polyakova about the Russian economy, the recent Cabinet reshuffles in the Kremlin, and how local politics are back in Russia.Vladimir Milov is the current economic advisor to Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, and the former deputy minister of energy in the Russian government. This week, Milov spoke to Alina Polyakova about the Russian economy, the recent Cabinet reshuffles in the Kremlin, and how local politics are back in Russia.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Darrell Blocker retired from the Central Intelligence Agency in 2018 after serving as an operations officer and manager in many countries, especially within Africa. His self-described lack of success recruiting assets during early assignments nevertheless taught him important lessons about the intelligence business, about how people work, and about himself; later tours of duty gave him the chance to make up for lost time by excelling at the job while also getting shot at and even gaining minor fame as the lead singer in an African jazz band. Blocker left CIA service as one of the most senior black officers in the Agency's history—and he was reportedly on President Biden's shortlist to become the director of the CIA. Now, he's involved in several creative projects in Hollywood.On this episode of Chatter, David Priess chatted with Blocker about his career and his activities since retirement. They discussed getting spy stories told on film, growing up as an Air Force brat, understanding the Pledge of Allegiance, stumbling early in an intelligence career, appreciating the operational environment in Africa, growing from mistakes, accepting lessons from 360-degree feedback, performing on stage in a jazz band, singing the national anthem, being considered as a CIA director, enhancing the CIA's interactions with the media, learning about the benefits of fictional representations of Hollywood's take on intelligence, and more.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 31, 2019: Iran is in turmoil. Protests erupted across the country last month, sparked by the government's decision to triple the price of gasoline. The Iranian government has responded with brute force, imposing a blackout of the internet and deploying security forces to crack down in the streets. The crackdown has left hundreds dead and thousands injured or detained. On December 18, the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution hosted a discussion on the unrest in Iran, what it means for the future of the country and the region, and how the United States and the international community should respond. Washington Post columnist David Ignatius led the conversation, which featured Brookings senior fellow Suzanne Maloney and film maker and journalist Maziar Bahari, who leads IranWire, a news site that conveys original information from Iran via citizen journalists.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been a tumultuous few weeks in Iran with the death of a young woman at the hands of the morality police leading to street protests all over the country, calls for the death of the supreme leader, and widespread opposition to compulsory wearing of the hijab. To chew it all over and figure out where this is all going, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Suzanne Maloney, the vice president for Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution and a long-time Iran policy scholar. They talked about whether these protests are the latest round of something we've seen before or whether there's something different going on, about the regime's reaction and whether it's connected to unrest elsewhere in the world, about how the United States can constructively respond, and about where it is all going from here. Note: Wittes incorrectly states that Maloney is vice president of Brookings Governance instead of Foreign Policy Studies.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ben Wittes sits down for a quick update on the prosecution’s case in the Oath Keepers’ seditious conspiracy trial from Senior Editor Roger Parloff, who has been covering the trial for Lawfare.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States is looking to curb China's advanced computing and chip production capabilities by using the so-called Foreign-Direct Product Rule to prevent companies globally from selling certain advanced computing chips to Chinese buyers without a U.S. government license. To understand the background, the details, and the implications of this, Lawfare publisher David Priess sat down with Martijn Rasser, senior fellow and director of the Technology and National Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. Martijn also served as a senior intelligence officer and analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency and a senior adviser in the office of the Secretary of Defense. They talked about the nature of the semiconductor industry, what a Foreign-Direct Product Rule is and what it can do, whether the Commerce Department is well positioned to do what's proposed, the tension of working with allies versus going it alone, and the precedent of U.S.-led actions against Huawei.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

After months of mostly quiet, behind-the-scenes debate, both the House and Senate seem ready to move forward with reforming the Electoral Count Act, the 1887 statute governing how Congress counts electoral votes, whose various ambiguities played a central role in unsuccessful plans to turn the 2020 election results in favor of former President Trump. Experts are all but unanimous on the need to reform the law, and both proposals have at least some bipartisan support, including from Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell. But the path forward remains far from certain. To discuss what comes next, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Ned Foley, a leading election law expert and professor at The Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law, and Genevieve Nadeau, a Counsel at the organization Protect Democracy who has been engaging on reform efforts. They discussed the similarities and differences between the House and Senate reform proposals, how they will strengthen our election process, and what work remains to be done. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today, we’re bringing you another episode of our Arbiters of Truth series on the online information ecosystem. Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Mark Bergen, a reporter for Bloomberg News and Businessweek, about his new book, “Like, Comment, Subscribe: Inside YouTube’s Chaotic Rise to World Domination.” YouTube is one of the largest and most influential social media platforms, but Bergen argues that it’s long been “criminally undercovered.” As he tells it, the story of YouTube has a great deal to tell us about the development of the modern attention economy, the promise and pitfalls of the internet, and the struggles of platforms to grapple with their own influence and responsibility. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There's been a lot going on in Russia: a partial mobilization, protests, a mysterious explosion underwater along the Nord Stream pipelines, and most recently, the annexation of seized Ukrainian territory in a bizarre ceremony in Moscow. To go over it all, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Julia Ioffe, currently of Puck, and Alexander Vindman, Lawfare’s Pritzker Military Fellow and a former Eastern Europe and Russia specialist for the NSC. They talked about the explosions along the Nord Stream pipelines, the protests, the annexations, and the threat of nuclear escalation.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Every year, the eastern United States faces the prospect—and, too often, the reality—of major hurricanes that cause extensive physical and financial damage. This year is no exception; even as Hurricane Ian approaches the Gulf Coast, more storms are likely in the coming weeks.On this episode of Chatter, David Priess chatted with author Eric Jay Dolin about the history of Atlantic hurricanes, with a special focus on such storms' influence on U.S. national security. They spoke about the devastating 2017 hurricane season, how tropical systems are covered in the media, Ben Franklin's role in hurricane science, the role of Caribbean hurricanes in the American Revolution and the Spanish-American War, the evolution of the federal government's storm forecasting and crisis response efforts, hurricane hunter flights, attempts to use technology to disrupt massive storms, Hurricane Andrew (1992), the effects of climate change on tropical systems and their impact, viewing hurricanes as national security threats, how humans assess risk, and films about hurricanes.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From Monday, June 1, 2020: Journalist Bart Gellman is the author of the new book, "Dark Mirror: Edward Snowden and the American Surveillance State." Jack Goldsmith sat down with Gellman to discuss the book. They spoke about Gellman's reporting on the Snowden affair, the scope of the National Security Agency's surveillance capabilities, and press freedom as it relates to national security reporting.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In modern-day warfare, data is considered a weapons system, and the Russia-Ukraine armed conflict gives us some perspective into what warfare looks like in a data-rich, hyperconnected world. To talk about the pervasiveness of data in contemporary and future warfare, Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Brigadier General Shane Reeves, the dean of the Academic Board at West Point, and Robert Lawless, assistant professor in the Department of Law at West Point, to discuss their new piece, “Data-Rich Battlefields and the Future LOAC,” or law of armed conflict. They talked about the growing importance for militaries to be able to exploit data on the battlefield, the deception arms race that is emerging in the modern battlefield, and some key ways in which data-rich battlefields are putting pressure on the law of armed conflict.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week marked the end of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly, an annual event that brings world leaders together in New York and often serves as both a forum for and a barometer of international politics. This year's session was particularly notable, both because it was the first in-person session since the onset of the global coronavirus pandemic and because it was the first session since what many see as the greatest crisis in the United Nations history: Russia's invasion of Ukraine. To learn more about what went down at the UNGA, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Richard Gowan, the UN director for the International Crisis Group. They discussed how the Ukraine conflict shaped events at the session, how major powers like China and the United States responded, and what it might all mean for the future of both the conflict in Ukraine and the United Nations itself. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For much of its history, the United States has had a single law on the books that governs when the president can deploy the military to enforce federal law within the United States: the Insurrection Act. While the act hasn't been invoked in decades, it played an important role in several recent controversies, including the acts of Jan. 6. Now, some scholars have written the Jan. 6 commission, urging that it be included in the broader set of reforms that committee is reportedly getting ready to endorse. To learn more, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with the two authors of the recent submission to the committee: Liza Goitein, senior director of the Liberty & National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, and her colleague Joseph Nunn, counsel at the same program. They discussed the history of the Insurrection Act, what they think makes it dangerous, and how Congress should try to fix it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In just under a week, on October 2, Brazil will hold the first round of its general election, which will determine the country's next president. To talk through all things Brazilian politics, Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Brian Winter, editor-in-chief of Americas Quarterly and a journalist with over a decade of experience living and reporting across Latin America. They discussed the leading candidates, Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the potential election crisis, and what's at stake as Brazilians head to the polls on Sunday. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Stewart Rhodes, the chieftain of the Oath Keepers, goes on trial this week for seditious conspiracy. The trial is expected to run about five weeks, with jury selection sort of already underway. The opening of the trial gives us a great opportunity to catch up with Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff on the Oath Keepers, the chief defendant Stewart Rhodes, and the larger project of criminal accountability for the Jan. 6 riot and insurrection.Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Roger to talk about the ever-mounting statistics of convictions and sentencing in Jan. 6-related matters. They talked about Stewart Rhodes: who he is and his weird journey from Yale Law School to conspiracy theorizing and violent uprisings. They talked about the specifics of the indictment. They talked about what makes Proud Boys different from Oath Keepers: who was the pointy end of the spear, and who was standing around waiting for the president to invoke the Insurrection Act? And they talked about the law under which this is taking place: the famed seditious conspiracy statute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott went guestless to discuss the week’s big national security news, including:“Ne Me Quitte Pas.” The nearby island nation of Haiti is hitting new levels of instability, as paired economic and political crises have given way to open gang warfare in broad swathes of the country. While the events have some calling for external intervention, others have expressed major reservations with such a step, given its past failings in the country. Where might this crisis lead?“I’m Rubber, You’re Su(ing).” Last week, the Fifth Circuit released a real barn-burner of an opinion in the matter of NetChoice v. Paxton, wherein it adopted a narrow reading of the First Amendment in order to resurrect a Texas law severely limiting how social media platforms can moderate content. What will this case mean for platforms moving forward?“Flying Worst Class.” Florida Governor Ron Desantis became the latest Republican governor this week to fly undocumented migrants to northern cities in purported protest of the Biden administration’s immigration policies. But his move has sparked unexpected furor among Florida’s Cuban and Venezuelan immigrant communities—as well as at least one criminal investigation. What was he thinking and where will this controversy go next?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 15, 2020: We talk a lot about Chinese policy in Hong Kong, but there's another human rights crisis going on in China in the province of Xinjiang. It concerns the Turkic minority known as the Uighurs whom the Chinese government has been rounding up and putting in reeducation camps. It is an ugly story—one that the Chinese government has gone to great lengths to keep from international attention, with some degree of success. To walk us through the situation in Xinjiang, Benjamin Wittes spoke with Jessica Batke, a senior editor at ChinaFile; Darren Byler, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Colorado at Boulder whose research focuses on Uighur dispossession; and Maya Wang, a senior China researcher for Human Rights Watch, who has written extensively on the use of biometrics, artificial intelligence and big data in mass surveillance in China.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our Arbiters of Truth series on the online information ecosystem has been taking a bit of a hiatus—but we’re back! On today’s episode, we’re discussing the recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in NetChoice v. Paxton, upholding a Texas law that binds large social media platforms to certain transparency requirements and significantly limits their ability to moderate content. The decision is truly a wild ride—so unhinged that it’s difficult to figure out where First Amendment law in this area might go next.To discuss, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with fellow Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein and Alex Abdo, the litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University—who’s come on the podcast before to discuss the case. They tried to make sense of the Fifth Circuit’s ruling and chart out alternative possibilities for what good-faith jurisprudence on social media regulation might look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There's enormous debate about how much social media platforms should be doing to moderate extremist content. But that debate often lacks nuance about the many different ways that platforms can moderate and that moderation is not an all or nothing proposition. Daniel Byman is a professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service and Lawfare’s foreign policy editor. He recently published a paper for Lawfare’s ongoing Digital Social Contract Research Paper series in which he lays out the many different ways that platforms can and do moderate content. Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Dan about his research and how it can inform not just more but better moderation.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This past Monday, the criminal trial of Thomas Barrack began in federal court in the Eastern District of New York. Barrack, who served as an informal advisor to the 2016 Trump campaign and then as chair of Trump's inaugural committee, is alleged to have acted as a foreign agent of the United Arab Emirates. According to the indictment, Barrack acted as a back channel for the UAE to influence U.S. foreign policy. Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Alex Iftimie, a partner at the law firm Morrison Foerster, and a former Department of Justice attorney specializing in national security matters, including the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, and related statutes. They discussed the case against Barrack, the significance of the charges to broader enforcement strategy, and why foreign influence matters for U.S. national security. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Geoffrey Berman was the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York in the Trump administration. He was appointed under peculiar circumstances, and he was fired under even more peculiar circumstances. He is now a partner at the law firm of Fried Frank, and he’s the author of the new book, “Holding the Line: Inside the Nation's Preeminent U.S. Attorney's Office and Its Battle with the Trump Justice Department.” He joined Benjamin Wittes to discuss the book’s shocking revelations of political interference in the Southern District's work by Bill Barr, by Donald Trump, and by others in the Justice Department. They also talked about the pattern of political interference, the relationship between it and more famous cases, the efforts by senior Justice Department officials to shift gears after the 2020 election, and whether this is a story of fragility in the U.S. Attorney's office or strength. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On September 15, Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida issued two key rulings in the Mar-a-Lago documents case. She appointed Judge Raymond Dearie of the Eastern District of New York as the special master reviewing the documents and denied the Justice Department’s motion for a partial stay of her previous injunction barring the department from using the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago in its criminal investigation. The next day, Friday, September 16, the Justice Department appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit for a partial stay of the September 15 ruling.Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down for a live conversation on Twitter Spaces with Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes and senior editors Scott Anderson and Alan Rozenshtein to talk through Cannon’s latest ruling. They recorded before the Justice Department filed its appeal, but the conversation is a useful breakdown of Cannon’s somewhat off-the-wall orders. Namely: what, exactly, is this judge doing? And where is the case headed next?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Of all of the Central Intelligence Agency's activities, paramilitary operations might remain the least understood. This, in part, is both a cause and a consequence of inaccurate portrayals of such work in prominent movies; it's also because fewer memoirs come from the CIA's Special Activities Division than from traditional human intelligence collectors and from analysts.David Priess chatted with former CIA officer Ric Prado about the fiction and the reality of CIA paramilitary operations, including stories Ric tells in his book, “Black Ops: The Life of a CIA Shadow Warrior.” They spoke about what Hollywood gets wrong about intelligence work, Ric's escape as a child from Castro's Cuba, his path to a CIA career, differences between paramilitary operations and intelligence collection, his years of work with the Contras in Central America, the Counterterrorist Center (CTC) at CIA before and on 9/11, the work ethic in CTC after 9/11, why his book has substantial chunks of redacted text, and who he thinks played the best James Bond.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced by David Priess with Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo, with additional editing by Cara Shillenn. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 17, 2018: In 1963, John Feerick became a witness to and a framer of our constitutional history. Within two years of graduating from law school, Feerick had written an influential law review article on presidential disability and succession, joined the ABA’s blue-ribbon commission to create a solution to those problems, and became a confidant and an adviser to the members of Congress who wrote the 25th amendment.As many in the public wonder about the current president’s fitness, Matthew Kahn went up to Fordham Law School, where Feerick is now dean emeritus, for a conversation about the page of the constitution he helped write. They talked about how Dean Feerick got involved in the creation of the 25th amendment, how Congress settled on the scheme the amendment enshrines, where it still has gaps and ambiguity, and how political leadership and the public should understand it in modern times.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ken Starr, the former federal judge and independent counsel who became famous for his investigation of President Bill Clinton, died this week on September 13 at age 76. Starr was a complex and controversial figure: after running the Whitewater and Lewinsky investigations, he went on to serve as president of Baylor University, only to resign over the mishandling of a sex abuse scandal involving the university’s football team, and he would later go on to defend President Trump in Trump’s first impeachment.To think through Starr’s legacy, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes, who published a book on Starr, and Lawfare contributing editor Paul Rosenzweig, who worked with Starr on the Clinton investigation. They took a look back on the Starr investigation and how the probe shaped the culture and practice of presidential investigations in ways that are more relevant than ever in the Trump era.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dmitri Alperovitch is the founder of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, a geopolitics think tank in Washington, and the impresario of the Geopolitics Decanted podcast. He joined Benjamin Wittes to talk through the Ukrainian offensive in Kharkiv Oblast last week. They discussed whether the Ukrainian retaking of large swaths of territory is a big deal, what’s going to come next, and if this is a prelude to a larger rout of Russian forces, to a negotiated settlement, or if something else is going to happen. They also talked about whether the Russians are running out of ammunition and people, or if the Ukrainian economy will collapse before victory.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Amid the war and instability in Afghanistan over the last two decades, the opium industry has seen explosive growth. In fact, Afghanistan accounts for the vast majority of the world's opium supply. The Taliban vowed to crack down on the production of illicit drugs, and in March, they issued a total ban on opium cultivation, which has stripped many rural Afghans of their livelihoods. But in the meantime, drug prices have been increasing, making the production and trafficking of methamphetamines even more profitable. To discuss the situation, former Lawfare associate editor Tia Sewell sat down with Rupert Stone, an independent journalist who recently published a piece with the Atlantic Council entitled, “Afghanistan’s Drug Trade is Booming Under Taliban Rule.” They discussed how Afghanistan's drug trade has evolved under the Taliban, the growing problems of addiction, and how the Taliban's rule has affected the export and trafficking of illicit drugs in the broader region.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since his 1991 death, Rainer Sonntag has been remembered as a martyr by generations of neo-Nazis and other far-right activists, especially in his native Germany. Less discussed, however, is the fact that he was also a spy for the communist authorities of East Germany and their counterparts in the Soviet Union—and that a young KGB operative named Vladimir Putin played a prominent role in his rise to power. To learn more, Lawfare senior editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Leigh Baldwin, the editor of SourceMaterial, and independent journalist Sean Williams, who co-authored a recent article on the relationship between Putin and Sonntag for The Atavist Magazine, entitled “Follow the Leader.” They discussed the relationship between communist intelligence agencies and far-right German movements, how those movements reacted to the reunification of Germany, and what Putin might have learned from his early dalliances with foreign far-right political movements. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Pakistan is experiencing one of the largest natural disasters in modern history. The massive floods there, combined with glacier melt, have led to one third of the country being submerged underwater with more than one million people displaced and tens of billions of dollars in damage.Lawfare publisher David Priess sat down with Erin Sikorsky, the director for the Center for Climate and Security, who has over a decade of experience previously in the U.S. intelligence community looking at issues like climate and security. They talked about the situation in Pakistan, its impact on the Pakistani military and security services, how the Pakistani military is being employed to help with flood relief, the impact on regional security and the ultimate impact on U.S. national security, and how we address climate change.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 25, 2022: In this bonus episode of Chatter, David Priess talks with professor and author Marita Sturken about 9/11-related memorials, museums, and architecture. Her research and writings have examined everything from visual culture to the connection between memory and consumerism, with much of her recent work addressing memory of the attacks on September 11, 2001, as both the battleground and the site for negotiations of national identity.In this conversation, they talked briefly about various historical memorials and the purposes of such work before comparing and contrasting the 9/11 memorials around the country and those at Ground Zero, next to the Pentagon, and in Somerset County, Pennsylvania. They also discussed controversies surrounding the National September 11 Memorial Museum (commonly called the "9/11 museum"), including those about its gift shop and about human remains currently in the facility.Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by co-host emeriti Ben Wittes and Shane Harris for a very special anniversary edition of Rational Security that pits their national security hot takes up against each other.Which of the following takes will the team find to be "too hot," which "undercooked," and which "just right"?Americans (and especially progressives) will regret reviving the prospect of disqualifying people under section 3 of the 14th Amendment.Over the next year, there will be a windfall of information regarding unidentified aerial phenomena, including some pointing to possible extraterrestrial origin.A President Ron Desantis won't be as dangerous as President Donald Trump.Russia's terminal decline presents one of the greatest threats to global security.American democracy will be saved by social conservative minorities voting for the Republican Party. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 3, 2020: This week on Lawfare's Arbiters of Truth series on disinformation, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Alissa Starzak, the head of public policy at Cloudflare—a company that provides key components of the infrastructure that helps websites stay online. They talked about two high-profile incidents in which Cloudflare decided to pull its services from websites publishing or hosting extremist, violent content. In August 2017, after the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Cloudflare’s CEO Matthew Prince announced that he would no longer be providing service to the Neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer. Two years later, Cloudflare also pulled service from the forum 8chan after the forum was linked to a string of violent attacks.They talked about what Cloudflare actually does and why blocking a website from using its services has such a big effect. They also discussed how Cloudflare—which isn’t a social media platform like Facebook or Twitter—thinks about its role in deciding what content should and shouldn’t stay up.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On August 25, the Defense Department released its long-awaited Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan, something that human rights advocates have called on the Pentagon to do for the past 20 years. To discuss it, former Lawfare associate editor Tia Sewell sat down with Todd Huntley, a former JAG and current director of the National Security Law Program at Georgetown University Law Center, as well as Marc Garlasco, a former targeting professional and war crimes investigator who consulted on the plan. They talked about Todd’s and Marc’s respective Lawfare articles on the topic and how this new action plan improves the Pentagon's handling of civilian harm in war or not.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On August 23, the Washington Post published a story about a whistleblower complaint filed by Peiter Zatko, the former security lead and member of Twitter's executive team responsible for information security, privacy, physical security, and information technology. In the whistleblower complaint, Zatko describes extreme problems and deficiencies with the security, privacy, and integrity of Twitter's platform. The complaint also alleges that since 2011, Twitter's senior executives have engaged in making false and misleading statements to users and the Federal Trade Commission about Twitter's privacy, security, and integrity.Lawfare senior editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Justin Sherman, a fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Cyber Statecraft Initiative, to discuss some of the most interesting aspects of the complaint. They talked about some of the background leading up to the filing of the complaint, some of its most significant alleged privacy and security violations, and what to look for in the upcoming congressional hearing on the complaint.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Monday afternoon, a federal judge in Florida acceded to Donald Trump's motion to appoint a special master to review privilege claims arising out of the Mar-a-Lago search. The ruling was not a particular surprise given that the judge had foreshadowed that it was coming, but it shocked observers nonetheless on a number of different bases. The decision raised questions of how it would affect the Justice Department's ongoing investigation of document retention at Mar-a-Lago. Would the department appeal, would it seek a stay, and who could possibly serve as special master for such a task?Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down before a live audience on Twitter Spaces with Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett, Lawfare contributing editor Jonathan Shaub, and Lawfare student contributor Anna Bower, who attended the hearing. They talked about whether the opinion is quite as outlandish as many commentators seem to think, about how the Justice Department would likely respond, and whether it could just let it stand. They also nominated their picks for special master and took questions from the audience. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.