On March 4, the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. Anderson, holding that states cannot disqualify Donald Trump from appearing on the presidential ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Section 3 bars former officeholders who have since engaged in insurrection from taking future public office—and in recent months, a slew of lawsuits from voters and advocacy groups have pointed to the provision in seeking to strike Trump from the ballot in various states for his conduct on Jan. 6. The Court’s judgment rules out that possibility—but leaves a surprising amount of questions unsettled, in a way that may queue up chaos in the coming months.To make sense of the Court’s ruling, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with fellow Senior Editor Roger Parloff, who has been closely watching the Section 3 cases; Ned Foley, an expert in election law at The Ohio State University; and Gerard Magliocca of Indiana University, who has been studying Section 3 since before it was cool. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien joined Alan, Quinta, and Scott to discuss the week's big national security news, including:“Operation Humbled Drop.” After months of unsuccessfully pushing the Israeli government to allow more aid into besieged Gaza, the Biden administration has taken matters into its own hands and begun airlifting it in itself. But are its efforts just for show, or a sign that it is abandoning its “bear hug” approach to Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu? And what will it mean for the flow of U.S. assistance to Israel, especially given legal restrictions Israel’s actions arguably violate? “Sound (Legal Reasoning) and Fury(ous Agreement).” This week, the Supreme Court surprised no one by unanimously reversing the Colorado Supreme Court and holding that former President Trump cannot be kept off the 2024 ballot there for having committed insurrection through his involvement in Jan. 6—a move the justices had strongly telegraphed in oral arguments in February. But for a unanimous outcome, the matter did prove surprisingly divisive, with the liberal minority accusing the conservative majority of overreaching to save Trump from possible future disqualification through other avenues. What should we make of the divided opinions in this case? And where does it leave Trump?“Smog of War.” Even as the New York Times finds itself in the midst of an internal (and external) controversy around its coverage of Hamas’s alleged use of sexual assault during the Oct. 7 massacre, the United Nations has released a report lending credibility to the conclusion that sexual assault occurred. How should we parse the competing accounts around this heated and incredibly difficult topic?For object lessons, Alan—much to his surprise—recommended the Formula 1 documentary Formula 1: Drive to Survive. Quinta flagged another Sen. Menendez superseding indictment to add to New Jersey’s state flag. Scott hit both sides of the RatSec listenership with recommendations: one for “Bucking the Buck,” Daniel McDowell’s excellent deep dive into de-dollarization, and another for his parasocial friends on The Ringer NFL Show in its various iterations, who he hopes will give D.C. the regional sports podcast it deserves. And Tyler celebrated the spectacle that is Medieval Times as well as the fact that the serfs there have recently unionized.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 March 7 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Riverside. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower to talk about recent filings in the Southern District of Florida and what Judge Cannon needs to rule on. They also discussed motions filed in Fulton County, the Supreme Court's ruling overturning the Colorado Supreme Court's decision to bar Trump from the 2024 ballot, and what, if anything, is happening in the Jan. 6 case in Washington. And of course, they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Riverside.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 28, 2019: At the Texas Tribune Festival in Austin, Texas, Benjamin Wittes sat down in front of a live audience with Judge John Bates, a senior district judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Bates has served on the court since 2001, and from 2009 to 2013, he served as the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court. Wittes and Judge Bates talked about the role of the FISA Court, its procedures and caseload, its recent prominence in the news, and how the court might respond to cases that have an overtly political context.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The practice of surveillance capitalism—the widespread private collection and commodification of personal data—is well understood. Less well understood is the extent to which the U.S. government purchases this data in the commercial marketplace to use it for intelligence and law enforcement purposes. Byron Tau, when he was a reporter with The Wall Street Journal, did more than anyone to bring this practice to public light. Jack Goldsmith sat down recently with Tau to discuss his new book on the topic, “Means of Control: How the Hidden Alliance of Tech and Government is Creating a New American Surveillance State.” They discussed how the private broker market works, why the government is able to purchase bulk private data with relatively few legal restrictions, and the threat to privacy and civil liberties that inheres in the practice. They also discussed why this form of data is so important to the government and the prospects for reform of the relatively unregulated practice.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jonna Mendez advanced in her Central Intelligence Agency career to become Chief of Disguise despite the many institutional challenges to women's promotions. And now she has written a memoir, In True Face, about it all.David Priess spoke with Jonna about career options for women at CIA in the early Cold War, her own start there in the 1960s, how photography classes set her on a path that ultimately led to service as Chief of Disguise, her interactions over the decades with Tony Mendez, the tandem-couple problem for intelligence professionals, semi-animated mask technology and other CIA disguises, her experience briefing President George H. W. Bush in the Oval Office, how the story behind the Canadian Caper became declassified and eventually the movie Argo, the International Spy Museum, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book In True Face by Jonna Mendez"How the CIA Used a Fake Sci-Fi Flick to Rescue Americans from Tehran," by Joshuah Bearman, WIRED, April 24, 2007The movie The Ides of MarchThe movie ArgoThe book Argo by Antonio Mendez and Matt BaglioThe book The Master of Disguise by Antonio MendezThe movie Mission ImpossibleThe TV show The AmericansThe TV show HomelandThe movie Casino RoyaleChatter 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.

Everyone agrees that the United States has a serious cybersecurity problem. But how to fix it—that's another question entirely. Over the past decade, a consensus has emerged across multiple administrations that NIST—the National Institute of Standards and Technology—is the right body to set cybersecurity standards for both the government and private industry. Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bryan Choi, who argues that this faith is misplaced. Choi is an associate professor of both law and computer science and engineering at The Ohio State University. He just published a new white paper in Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract paper series exploring NIST's history in setting information technology standards and why that history should make us skeptical that NIST can fulfill the cybersecurity demands that are increasingly being placed on it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Executive branch constraints and the posture of the media have shifted in significant ways over the past two decades. Lyrissa Lidsky and Christina Koningisor, law professors at the University of Florida and the University of California San Francisco, respectively, argue in a forthcoming law review article that these changes—including the erosion of certain post-Watergate reforms and the decline of local news—have created a First Amendment disequilibrium. They contend that the twin assumptions of the press’s power to extract information and check government authority on the one hand, and the limitations on executive branch power on the other, that undergird First Amendment jurisprudence no longer hold, leaving the press at a significant First Amendment disadvantage. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck spoke with Lidsky and Koningisor about the current state of First Amendment jurisprudence, the ways in which the press used to be stronger, executive branch power on the federal and state levels, how the authors think our current First Amendment architecture should change, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In mid-February, Chinese cybersecurity firm i-Soon appeared to suffer a massive data leak, which offered unprecedented insight into the operations of the company, known to contract for many Chinese government agencies. The more than 500 documents include conversations between employees, sales pitches, and internal documents, and expose the firm’s hacking methods, tools, and victims. They also show in what ways the offensive cyber industries in China and the U.S. are surprisingly similar.Eugenia Lostri, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, sat down with Winnona DeSombre Bernsen, nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council, to talk through the leaks and her research into the key similarities and differences between the Chinese companies and their counterparts. They talked about how the Chinese government hoards vulnerabilities, the similar contracting headaches that firms in the U.S. and China suffer from, and how the findings from this leak can be used to develop better norms.You can listen to the podcast conversation, “China’s Approach to Software Vulnerabilities Reporting,” with Dakota Cary and Kristin Del Rosso here. The conversation, “Rules for Civilian Hackers in War with Tilman Rodenhäuser and Mauro Vignati” is here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, a vital question is whether the legal architecture governing the election is well crafted to prevent corruption and abuse. In their new book, “How to Steal a Presidential Election,” Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman argue that despite the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022, serious abuse of the presidential election rules remains a live possibility. Jack Goldsmith sat down with Lessig to learn why. They discussed the continuing possibility of vice presidential mischief, the complex role of faithless electors, strategic behavior related to recounts, and the threat of rogue governors. They also pondered whether any system of rules can regulate elections in the face of widespread bad faith by the actors involved.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 Molly Reynolds and (a prerecorded) Anna Bower to talk through some of the week’s big national security news, including:“The Shutdown Rut.” Congress once again has the government on the verge of a shutdown. And while Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has reportedly committed to avoiding one, demands from within his caucus may make that hard—just as they continue to obstruct a path forward for the national security supplemental that contains essential assistance for Ukraine. Is there a way forward? Or are we shutdown-bound?“Sex, Lies, and Geolocation.” The criminal case against former President Trump and more than a dozen codefendants in Fulton County, Georgia, remains on hold as defense attorneys continue to dig into the details of Fani Willis’s romantic relationship with subordinate Nathan Wade. Over the last week, we’ve seen filings on geolocation data and the examination of Wade’s former attorney. But does any of this add up to a potentially disqualifying conflict of interest?“If This Segment Were a Newspaper, How Much Would It Weigh?” The Supreme Court heard extended oral arguments over the constitutionality of controversial Florida and Texas laws seeking to regulate content moderation on social media platforms this week. But amid some very interesting lines of questioning—including one inquiring the weight of YouTube if it were a newspaper—it wasn’t clear the Court was really ready and interested in delving into the technical details. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? And where might the Court come out?For object lessons, Quinta answered Justice Alito’s recent inquiry, “If YouTube were a newspaper, how much would it weigh?” Scott sang the praises of Bianco DiNapoli’s fire-roasted tomatoes. And Molly recommended the podcast Short Walk, about one of the stranger state-level political controversies in recent memory.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 29 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Riverside. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff, Lawfare Courts Correspondent and Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the Supreme Court's decision to hear Trump's presidential immunity claim and how much the D.C. trial may be delayed. They also discussed this week's hearing in Fulton County, previewed what to expect at the Friday Mar-a-Lago hearing in Florida, and talked about what is happening with the New York criminal trial. And of course, they took audience questions from Lawfare Material Supporters on Riverside.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 May 26, 2020: On Wednesday, NASA and the SpaceX Corporation are scheduled to send astronauts back into outer space from U.S. soil for the first time since the U.S. space shuttle program ended in 2011. The launch promises to kick off a new era in space exploration, one that will see the increased use of outer space for both public and private purposes, as well as greater involvement by private corporations and other unconventional actors in space exploration. To discuss the legal and policy challenges of this new era, Scott R. Anderson spoke with three lawyers working at the bleeding edge of space law and policy: Professor Timiebi Aganaba-Jeanty of Arizona State University and its Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law; Brian Israel, a former public and private sector space lawyer who teaches space law at Berkeley Law; and Daniel Porras, currently a space security fellow at the U.N. Institute for Disarmament Research.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Following Hamas’s attacks on Oct. 7, the Israeli military retaliated with a relentless and devastating air war. By mid-December, Israeli forces had struck more than 22,000 targets in Gaza, and the Israeli military said it had used artificial intelligence to select many of them. The targeting system, called “The Gospel” by the IDF, was not the first time a military used AI on the battlefield, but the high number of civilian casualties raised red flags for many.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Lauren Kahn, a Senior Research Analyst at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) who focuses on the national security applications of artificial intelligence. They discussed how autonomous and AI-enabled weapons are being used and will be used in war, “the current ground rules for the age of AI in warfare,” and why Lauren favors confidence-building measures and other incremental steps, rather than an all-out ban. And despite running through a few nightmare scenarios, we learned why Lauren remains hopeful for the responsible and ethical use of AI for defense.  Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We all know how superpower competition spurred one giant leap for mankind on the lunar surface in July 1969. But the story of how the Moon and its tides affect national security is deeper and wider than most of us realize.David Priess explored this intersection with science journalist Rebecca Boyle, author of the new book Our Moon, about her path to writing about astronomy, Anaxagoras, Julius Caesar, lunar versus solar calendars, the Battle of Tarawa in 1943, the genesis of NOAA, tides and flooding, Johannes Kepler, Jules Verne and science fiction about travel to the Moon, lunar missions and the Cold War, the Moon's origins, the return of lunar geopolitical competition, prospects for a radio telescope on the far side of the Moon, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book Our Moon by Rebecca BoyleThe book From the Earth to the Moon by Jules VerneThe movie Fantasia"Massive New Seamount Discovered in International Waters Off Guatemala," from the Schmidt Ocean Institute, November 22, 2023Chatter 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.

Over the past several decades, financial sanctions have become one of the most widely used tools in the U.S. foreign policy arsenal. And since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine two years ago, the Biden administration has wielded them in a number of innovative ways. At the same time, some of these uses have also triggered concerns about U.S. overreach, something that could have consequences for both U.S. national security and the health of the U.S. economy. To better understand how the U.S. government is approaching its financial sanctions policies today, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson and Lawfare Contributing Editor Brandon Van Grack sat down with the man who manages them: Brad Smith, the Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (or “OFAC”) at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. A veteran of U.S. sanctions policy, Smith walked through some of the history of sanctions, lessons the Biden administration has learned from past efforts, and how these lessons are being applied to new challenges, including from Russia. This is the latest entry in our special “The Regulators” series, co-sponsored with Morrison Foerster, in which Brandon and Scott sit down with some of the senior officials working at the front lines of U.S. national security policy. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Feb. 13, Senator Ron Wyden released a letter documenting an investigation his office has been conducting into the activities of Near Intelligence Inc., a data broker that allegedly enabled an anti-abortion organization to target anti-abortion messaging and ads to people visiting 600 Planned Parenthood clinics across the United States. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Justin Sherman, CEO of Global Cyber Strategies and a Senior Fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy, to discuss this investigation. They talked about the various players in the data broker ecosystem that enable these invasive practices, the lack of federal legislation governing and preventing these activities, and what actions the FTC might be able to take against Near Intelligence Inc. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court heard hours and hours of oral arguments today brought by a trade association called NetChoice against laws restricting content moderation in Florida and Texas. It's the big First Amendment case of the year, and we sat through the whole oral argument.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein, and Kyle Langvardt of the University of Nebraska at Lincoln. They talked about where the justices seem to be leaning on this case, why they think the record is inadequate and underdeveloped, and why they're grumpy about it. They also talked about whether we can predict where they seem to be headed and about why this case that doesn't involve Section 230 seems to involve Section 230.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

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.