Afleveringen
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Kevin Frazier, Roger Parloff, and Molly Roberts to talk through some of the week’s big news in AI, including:
“Citizen Cain’t.” When the NAACP sued Elon Musk’s xAI under the Clean Air Act—alleging that the company built dozens of gas-fired turbines to power a data center in Mississippi without relevant air permits and exposing nearby, predominantly Black communities to harmful pollution—the Justice Department opted to do something it has never done before: it intervened in a citizen suit against a private company in order to kill it. DOJ’s motion offers two theories: first, that shutting down the turbines would threaten national security because the military relies on xAI’s Grok Gov model (including in relation to the Iran war) to secure the nation, and second, that the Constitution’s vesting of executive power in the president means private citizens cannot enforce federal law over the executive’s objection. How strong are these arguments? And what would it mean for environmental and other citizen-enforcement suits if DOJ were to prevail?“Grok the Vote.” We may be living through the first true “AI elections.” In Manhattan’s NY-12 Democratic primary, more than $40 million in AI-industry and AI-safety money turned a little-known assemblyman, Alex Bores, into something of a national referendum on whether voters care about AI regulation and AI safety—though Bores ultimately lost to Micah Lasher this week. Meanwhile, overseas in Malaysia, parties are using chatbots and other AI-driven technologies to reach out to voters in new and novel ways. And just this week in Washington, a new study has concluded that frontier AI is perhaps more persuasive than ever, but also may not be as politically neutral as some suspect or one might hope. What does this all mean for democratic politics when both money and the messaging involved in our politics are increasingly shaped by AI?“Kill, Kill Switch, Kill, Kill!” The government's frontier-AI "kill switch" is now ready to have its first day in court. If you recall, a few weeks ago, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security sent Anthropic an "Is Informed" letter ordering it to suspend all access to its Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models for any foreign nationals, including its own employees. This ultimately led Anthropic to pull access to those models for everyone within hours. But this past Monday, June 22, a technology startup called Legion LegalTech filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government alleging that it has acted in a way that is unlawful and raises a number of statutory and constitutional concerns. How strong is the legal challenge, and what does it tell us about whether courts—rather than the executive—will end up defining the government's power to switch a frontier model on and off?In object lessons, Molly sticks to the script for this week’s episode with her call-out of Erik Nitsche’s “Atoms for Peace” poster series for General Dynamics. Also inspired by this week’s theme, Kevin dives into some “light summer reading” about technology, globalization, and the law with “Rules for a Flat World,” by Gillian Hadfield. Roger, similarly, is “unwinding” with “The Winter Warriors,” by Olivier Norek, a novel about the lesser-known David vs. Goliath story of Finland taking on the Soviet Union in 1939. And Scott says enough already! He’s headed on vacation next week, and so is Rational Security. We’ll be back with a new episode and a rejuvenated Scott on July 9.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with cohost emeritus and Lawfare Research Director Alan Rozenshtein, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien, Lawfare Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:
“Fission Accomplished.” After nearly four months of war, the United States and Iran have reached a deal to end the conflict—with Trump declaring it “complete” and authorizing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz ahead of a formal signing ceremony set for June 19 in Switzerland. But the agreement leaves enormous questions unresolved, from the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium to sanctions relief to whether the ceasefire extends to Israel’s campaign in Lebanon. Is this the durable peace Trump claims, or a fragile pause papering over the hardest issues?“Model Misbehavior.” Days after Anthropic publicly released its powerful new Claude Fable 5 model, the Commerce Department imposed export controls barring any foreign national—inside or outside the U.S.—from accessing it, forcing the company to disable the model worldwide. The administration says Anthropic recklessly refused to fix a dangerous jailbreak; Anthropic says it was a narrow, non-serious vulnerability and the order is a misunderstanding. What does this episode tell us about the government’s expanding use of export controls on AI—and its increasingly adversarial relationship with one of the country’s leading labs?“Bad Vibrations.” In one of her final acts as Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard rescinded two Biden-era intelligence assessments that had cast doubt on whether a foreign adversary was behind “Havana Syndrome,” the mysterious ailments afflicting U.S. spies and diplomats. Gabbard’s office says the prior assessments cherry-picked intelligence to support a predetermined conclusion; critics worry about a politically motivated rewrite of analytic findings on the way out the door. What should we make of this last-minute reversal, and what does it mean for the future of the Havana syndrome debate—and Gabbard’s legacy as DNI?In object lessons, Tyler remains steadfast in his mission to ensure that no one ever runs out of podcasts, this week plugging A Whole Other Country, a discovery from Tribeca Festival Audio. Alan embraces peak dad-tech with his bbq upgrade—a new, after-market temperature controller. Scott savors a delightfully spicy Supreme Court dust-up in FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd. And Julia celebrates her mug, an appropriate mainstay during her post-White-House-PDB “deep state therapy hour.”
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
This week, Scott was joined by his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Michael Feinberg, and Molly Roberts to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:
“Blanche Check.” DOJ may soon have a new permanent leader, as President Trump has now formally nominated Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to the role permanently. But to secure Trump’s support, Blanche has indulged some of Trump’s most concerning instincts, as evidenced by the attempt to establish an anti-weaponization fund for Trump allies and renewed indictments of figures like former FBI Director James Comey. Meanwhile, DOJ has seen scandal after scandal during Blanche’s tenure over the rapidly declining quality and credibility of its work, exemplified most recently by evidence of grand jury tampering, arguably, in the Broadview Six prosecutions. What should we expect of DOJ under a confirmed Blanche? And how enduring will some of the harm that may result be for the department?“Tinker, Tailor, Realtor, Spy.” President Trump’s decision to dual-hat Federal Housing Finance Agency director Bill Pulte—a man with no national security experience, who is best known for using his role at the FHFA to facilitate some of Trump’s most transparent attacks on perceived political enemies—as Acting Director of National Intelligence has triggered strong reactions across the political spectrum. This includes a threat by congressional Democrats to kill renewal of Section 702 surveillance authorities if Pulte remains in the acting position. But Trump has thus far refused to back down. What does Pulte’s appointment—and the potential expiration of Section 702—mean for national security?“Pratt Falls.” The open primary in the Los Angeles mayor’s race is over, and Trump-endorsed candidate Spencer Pratt finished just outside the final two who will proceed into the general election. But U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, a Trump loyalist, has suggested that voter fraud investigations are ongoing, leading some other Republican officials and leaders to call the results into question. What should we make of these unsubstantiated allegations? And are they a preview of what Republicans have planned for 2026?In object lessons, Mike is kraken himself up over his plans to create the ultimate toy for his child. Ben is announcing the beta release of RAGtime, the tool that he (and Claude) developed to comb through large, messy datasets. Scott is heating things up in his backyard with his new Gozney pizza oven. And Molly is quacking up about her mallard, acquired from (the now unfortunately closed) Archipelago in Maine.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Ukraine Fellow Anastasiia Lapatina and Managing Editor Tyler McBrien, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:
“The Empire Strikes Out.” Russia’s ground offensive in Ukraine appears to have hit some stiff resistance with it losing territory over the past calendar year in the face of a strong defense by Ukrainian forces—including strikes on Russian supply lines in Russia—and growing manpower shortages and economic pressures at home. But Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be compensating with one of the most brutal air campaigns in recent memory, including a massive aerial attack on Kyiv this week that forced tens of thousands of Ukrainians to shelter in place—including our own Nastya. What signs are there for optimism—or for caution—on the future of Russia’s war of aggression? And how will positive developments on the battlefield for Ukraine impact Russia’s demands at the negotiating table?“Strait Trippin’.” On Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the first time since the U.S. went to war with Iran and told senators that “the war is over.” This statement came just days after the United States and Iran traded strikes and Iranian state-run news outlets reported that it had broken off negotiations with the United States. President Trump, on the other hand, insists that the talks are still ongoing and appeared to pressure Israel to pull back from a major offensive against Hezbollah over the weekend. What do we make of these developments? Has there been any progress toward a negotiated solution to the conflict? Is there any reality to Secretary Rubio’s assertion that the war has come to an end?“Pulte Fiction.” President Trump announced an unexpected pick to take over the position of Director of National Intelligence on Tuesday: Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and heir to a residential home building empire, with apparently no national security experience whatsoever. Trump said Pulte will stay on as housing director and take over the job from Tulsi Gabbard in a part-time and acting capacity. So who exactly is he? And why does Trump trust him enough to pick him to serve, at least part time, in one of the country’s most important intelligence positions?In object lessons, the crew goes all in on what to read and listen to. Nastya is giving a nod to “The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century,” by Angela Stent. Tyler is giving two thumbs up to the work of architecture critic Kate Wagner. Scott is tapping his toe to Marisa Anderson’s “The Anthology of UnAmerican Folk Music.” And Ari is grooving to the Switched On Pop podcast, a deep dive into the music that moves us.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Anna Bower and Eric Columbus, and his Brookings colleague Molly Reynolds, to talk through a couple of the week’s big news stories in domestic politics, including:
“The Grift That Keeps On Giving.” Last week, the Justice Department announced the creation of a so-called Anti-Weaponization Fund of nearly 1.8 billion taxpayer dollars, from which purported victims of politically motivated prosecutions can apply to receive payments. The fund was created as part of a settlement with President Trump and his sons, who sued the IRS for 10 billion dollars over the leak of his tax returns. So far, pardoned Jan. 6 rioters, former Congressman George Santos, Trump’s ex attorney Michael Cohen, and even former FBI Director James Comey have all said that they are considering applying, and three lawsuits have already been filed challenging the fund. How did Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS lead to this fund? And how do we see these legal challenges playing out in court?“Lame Duck Around and Find Out.” President Trump’s preferred primary picks have cruised to victories in Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Georgia Republican primaries, ousting incumbents Senator Bill Cassidy and Representative Thomas Massie as some of the few voices of dissent within the Republican Party. But Trump’s involvement in the primaries has come at a political cost, with outgoing members voicing their criticism and even going so far as to buck the president on legislation. Last week, Cassidy flipped his vote in favor of a critical war powers resolution in the Senate, which could undermine the administration’s legal justification for the war. With such close margins in Congress, how do we expect this new YOLO faction to impact the president’s agenda before the midterms?While we introduced a third topic, we frankly ran out of time this week. Sorry about that! We’ll circle back to it in the weeks ahead.In object lessons, Molly is hooked on the fish-focused local NPR podcast, “Catching The Codfather.” Eric is looking to catch a killer with the latest Hugh Jackman movie (which he thinks is shear perfection). Scott is caught up in the latest “Storm,” featuring Yung Lean. And Anna has caught basketball fever, both with the Knicks’ return to the NBA Finals, and also with the (much-more-affordable-but-equally-entertaining) NY Liberty.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Brookings Senior Fellow Kari Heerman to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:
“With Friends Like Xi.” This past week, top U.S. officials and business CEOs traveled with President Trump to Beijing for his summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The summit had a warm air to it, with Trump going so far as to call Xi his “friend,” a far cry from his hawkish stance toward China during the campaign and his prior administration. But Trump left having made relatively few concrete deals on the host of issues dividing the U.S. and China. Did Trump miss an opportunity here? Or is the seeming thaw in relations a positive sign for future cooperation?“Dirty Dancing: Havana Fights.” Cuba ran out of oil last week, but the Trump administration’s pressure campaign against the island nation 90 miles off the coast of Florida has only intensified. On Monday, the U.S. announced new sanctions on three Cuban government agencies and 11 top officials amidst reports that the Department of Justice may seek an indictment against Raúl Castro, the 94-year-old brother of Fidel Castro and former president of Cuba. And surveillance flights over the island nation have reportedly increased in advance of an expected military build-up in coming weeks. How seriously should we take Trump’s threats to pursue regime change in yet another country after Iran and Venezuela? And how long can Cuba hang on with its economic situation becoming more dire?“I’ve Got 122 Problems, and a Tariff is One.” On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade struck down yet another round of Trump tariffs—this time, the across-the-board 10% Section 122 tariffs that President Trump had imposed after the Supreme Court invalidated the earlier tariffs he’d issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Specifically, the Court of International Trade ruled that the administration cannot meet the statutory requirements for using Section 122, though its ruling has since been stayed by the Federal Circuit pending appeal. Is this decision likely to stick? With another legal defeat, what options does the administration have left to follow through on Trump’s trade policy?In object lessons, Ben appeases the AI overlords with a glowing review of his latest experiments with Claude. Scott appeases his inner middle-aged man with a reprised recommendation of A Man on the Inside. And Kari fears that Americans are far from appeasing friends and allies in other democratic countries.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Senior Editor Michael Feinberg and Foreign Policy Editor Dana Stuster for a little chat with the guys about the week’s big national security news stories, including:
“Minding Your Bs and Ts.” President Trump arrived in China this week alongside top U.S. officials and business executives for a much-anticipated summit with President Xi Jinping. U.S. diplomats hope the summit will revolve around the “five Bs”—meaning U.S. beef, soybeans, Boeing airplanes, and proposed boards for investment and trade—while Chinese officials want to talk about the “three Ts” of Taiwan, technology, and tariffs. What should our expectations be for the summit? And how much will the Iran war loom over the negotiations?“Crude Awakening.” This past week, negotiations between Iran and the United States appeared to reach a standstill, without any movement on reopening the Strait of Hormuz or restoring the flow of oil and other goods that have driven crude oil prices to record highs. As each side seems poised to wait out the other, how long can they last before having to capitulate (or escalate)? And what do these dynamics mean for this war of attrition? “Cartel Blanche.” On Tuesday, CNN reported that the CIA has been conducting a covert campaign of assassinations in Mexico targeting mid-level members of the country’s drug cartels. Despite these reports—and the Trump administration’s longstanding claims that it is at “war” with the cartels—both the Mexican government and CIA have denied any involvement in these operations. What does this say about the Trump administration’s plans for future counter-narcotics operations? And the broader U.S.-Mexico relationship?In object lessons, Dana stresses that the key to a successful marriage—at least in his case—is a good microphone. Mike stresses that misery loves company, and despite the possible threat to his own marital bliss, contemplates a date night to AFI Silver’s Bleak Week. And Scott stresses that Lawfare does not exist without the support of listeners like you. Please consider contributing to our spring fundraising drive with a personally meaningful gift at lawfaremedia.org/support.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Molly Roberts, Roger Parloff, and Tyler McBrien to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:
“Jim Spells Seashells By the Seashore.” Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted again this past week, this time for allegedly threatening the life of the president by spelling “8647” in shells at the beach and posting an image on social media. It is a ludicrous argument. So what does it tell us that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was willing to file it? And where does Trump’s broader vengeance campaign seem likely to go from here, under whoever becomes the next Attorney General?“We Were on a Break!” The Iran War turned 60 days old last week—the deadline by which, under the War Powers Resolution, the president is supposed to wrap up any congressionally unauthorized military operations. But like many of its predecessors, the Trump administration has done no such thing. Instead, it’s argued that the 60-day cut-off was already met by the ongoing ceasefire—even though the Trump administration has continued its embargo of Iranian oil resources and began a new major maritime campaign to open the Strait of Hormuz, triggering exchanges of fire with Iranian forces. What should we make of these arguments? And do they suggest the War Powers Resolution is a dead letter?“Strictly Ballroom.” The Trump administration is actively working to capitalize on the recent assassination attempt on Trump to push a federal court to allow its construction of an East Wing ballroom on national security grounds. At the same time, it’s faced new judicial headwinds in its quixotic effort to take over a municipal golf course—the same location where it dumped the (potentially toxic) rubble of the demolished old East Wing. What do these cases tell us about Trump’s efforts to reshape our nation’s capital? And how legitimate are the new efforts to tie these cases to national security?In object lessons, Roger is revisiting Azar Nafisi’s “Reading Lolita in Tehran,” a tough, yet beautiful read with unfortunate persistent relevance. Molly is memorializing the current metro landscape with her desk globe of Washington, D.C. Scott is sharing his remembrance of Stewart Baker, forever a friend of Lawfare. And Tyler is taking us back to 1971 Boston and Catholic resistance to the Vietnam War with the Divine Intervention podcast.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Contributing Editors Ariane Tabatabai and Joel Braunold, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:
“The Art of the Heel.” As it approaches the 60-day mark, the war of Iran appears to have entered the “war of attrition” stage. The Strait of Hormuz remains closed by both Iran and the United States, as each side waits to see if the other will capitulate first. President Trump recently called off peace talks in Islamabad, in part because of purported internal disarray on the part of Iran—a perhaps unsurprising consequence of a two-month campaign of regime change. Meanwhile, the White House appears to have successfully pushed for and and then extended a ceasefire in the related theater of Lebanon, but it is already under strain from ongoing Israeli strikes and Hezbollah’s ensuing refusal to disarm. What should we make of this new equilibrium? And does it suggest that there is any way out of the current morass in the near future?“Royally Falked.” King Charles is in the United States this week for the first state visit by a British monarch since Queen Elizabeth in 2007. But the Trump administration’s latest round of antics toward the United Kingdom and other NATO allies may overshadow the trip. Over the weekend, Reuters reported that an internal Pentagon email suggested that the administration should explore withdrawing U.S. recognition of British control over the Falkland Islands and suspending Spain from NATO due to their refusal to join U.S.-Israeli combat operations against Iran. Other consequences may yet be in the offing. How seriously should we take these threats from the Pentagon? And how close are we to a permanent rupture in the United States’s preeminent alliance?“Ballroom Blitz.” On Saturday night, President Trump was the target of a third assassination attempt since the 2024 campaign. This time, a California teacher plotted to target Trump and his senior advisers at the annual White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner. In response, the administration quickly blamed Democrats for the heated, sometimes violent rhetoric they use in criticizing Trump and focused its attention on pressuring a federal court to end a civil case challenging the construction of the new White House ballroom, citing security concerns. What were some of our thoughts about this past weekend’s events?In object lessons, Ari is taking control of the narrative with Split Fiction for the Switch 2. Natalie is taking herself out for a treat to Boulangerie Saint Georges near Eastern Market. Scott is taking a break from his own podcast to appreciate Iran: The Latest from The Telegraph. And Joel is taking a lesson from the NFL draft that may delight both sportsball and non-sportsball fans alike.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Eric Columbus, Molly Roberts, and Loren Voss to talk through a few of the week’s big news stories, including:
•“Meet Joe Flack.” The Justice Department’s ongoing investigation into the alleged “grand conspiracy” against President Trump in relation to the 2016 elections and their aftermath has entered a new phase this week with the appointment of Joseph diGenova, a former Reagan-era U.S. Attorney and political commentator, as counselor to the Attorney General in charge of the investigation. Meanwhile, reports indicate that the Justice Department may be preparing to bring charges against former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal Trump critic, whom diGenova has previously called a “traitor” in interviews with Fox News, even after the career attorney previously in charge of the investigation withdrew. What should we make of diGenova’s new role in this investigation? And how seriously should we take these attempts to prosecute Brennan and others allegedly involved in the “grand conspiracy”?
•“No Occupation Without Representation.” A district court officially closed out Trump v. Illinois this week, that case that ultimately led the Supreme Court to invalidate the grounds on which the Trump administration had federalized and deployed national guard troops to several states last year over the objections of their governors. But while those deployments have ended, other deployments remain ongoing – including the more than 2,500 soldiers that are still on the streets of Washington, D.C., whose deployments are expected to last as long as 2029. What are the limits on these other forms of domestic deployment? And what space does Trump v. Illinois leave for the Trump administration to renew more aggressive deployments if it sees fit?
•“Hungary for Change.” Last week, Hungary voted to end the sixteen year reign of Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his Fidesz Party, which have been frequently cited as models for President Trump and his MAGA movement. This was in spite of a last minute visit by U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance, which unsuccessfully sought to shore up support for Orban in the waning days of the campaign. How do we see Orban’s defeat playing out in the U.S. as the conservative movement begins to think about what comes next after the Trump presidency?
For object lessons, Eric recommended The Brick as a way to stop the noise of the internet from distracting you from your work (on your phone, at least). Molly showed off her matryoshka, or Russian nesting dolls, in celebration of the step back in Russian influence in Hungary. Scott celebrated in his own way, by recommending the new spy series Ponies, not so much for its authenticity, but for its incredibly stylish take on 1970s Moscow. And Loren recommended that D.C. locals stop by her favorite chai place, Afghan Chai in Dupont Circle.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Daniel Byman, Tyler McBrien, and Natalie Orpett to talk through aspects of the week’s biggest Iran-focused news stories, including:
“Situational Iran-y.” The world came into Tuesday evening fearing a major escalation in the ongoing U.S. and Israeli conflict with Iran. But instead, President Trump made a last-minute choice to accept a two-week ceasefire, conditional on the opening of the Strait of Hormuz—a condition that Iran indicated it was prepared to meet, kind of, so long as “open” means coordinating with its military forces (and paying) for safe transit. Is this the beginning of the end of the Iran conflict? And what does the shape of the ceasefire tell us about the conflict’s likely regional implications moving forward?“Verbal Iran-y.” Tuesday’s breakthrough ceasefire agreement came after days of increasingly outlandish rhetoric by President Trump, including a threat earlier that day that “a whole civilization will die tonight” if his conditions were not met. What role did Trump’s threats play in the outcome? And what might the broader ramifications might be of the U.S. president issuing threats that would amount to war crimes (if not genocide) if actually followed up on?“Dramatic Iran-y.” While Trump’s rhetoric was undoubtedly intended to communicate strength, it came from a place of increasing weakness. U.S. military operations in Iran were weeks away from a major statutory barrier, and efforts to secure needed supplemental funding are facing headwinds in Congress. Perhaps more importantly, the conflict has proven widely unpopular and devastating for the U.S. and broader global economy—two factors that weigh heavily on Trump and his congressional allies in an election year. What will this shift in the Iran conflict mean for Trump’s political future? Not to mention the legal and institutional arrangements that have allowed him to pursue so unorthodox a foreign policy in recent months?In object lessons, Dan is not playing games when simulating the 1960 presidential election. Natalie is delighting in another kind of history with the masterful writing in Claire Messud’s “This Strange Eventful History.” Scott is revisiting a 2002 Donald Trump review of “Citizen Kane” that has a somewhat surprising ending. And Tyler is recommending that you watch as much Artemis II content as humanly possible.
Note: We’re taking a little break next week, but keep an eye out for our next episode on April 23!
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Senior Editors Anna Bower, Kevin Frazier, and Kate Klonick to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:
“The X Post Facto Rule.” The Justice Department and lawyers representing Anthropic faced off last week in a Northern California courtroom over whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s X post and som related communications amounted to an official order and if the Pentagon’s supply chain risk designation retaliated against the company’s First Amendment-protected views, among other issues. On March 26, Judge Rita Lin, in that case, stayed the supply chain risk designation, ruling that the Pentagon had, in fact, retaliated unlawfully against Anthropic. We’re also waiting for another related decision from a D.C. Circuit panel, expected to come down any time now. What should we make of Judge Lin’s ruling, and do we expect the D.C. Circuit to follow suit? And what does it all mean for AI companies and their relationship with the government?“Strait Outta Options.” Oil, gas, helium, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizer—the ongoing conflict with Iran has upended global supply chains, with the Strait of Hormuz remaining closed as critical infrastructure in neighboring Gulf states faces Iranian attacks. The U.S. has started to feel the first of its effects through rising costs and a trepidatious stock market, reminiscent of the supply chain shortages felt during the coronavirus pandemic. It's unclear how severe and how long they will last, but what could be some of the national security and political implications if the supply chain shocks continue? And what does it mean for the trajectory of the Iran conflict?“Space: The Financial Frontier.” NASA astronauts launched this week on the Artemis II mission, the first crewed mission to orbit the moon in more than half a century. It’s the biggest step to date in the new emerging space race, most specifically with China—one driven predominantly by private actors, the biggest of whom, SpaceX, is preparing to make an unprecedentedly large initial public offering in coming weeks. How should we feel about this new, very different space race compared to past ones? And what might it mean, both for good and ill?In object lessons, Kate looks forward to filling the pages of her new notebook and ponders if she has so much to say that she’ll need another one. Anna wants immunity from ridicule for her love of Survivor. Scott is impatiently waiting for his chance to binge all of the new season of For All Mankind. And Kevin applauds boring AI—that is, using new technology to ease enduring human challenges.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Molly Roberts, Tyler McBrien, and Renée DiResta to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:
“The Meta-verse of Madness.” On Tuesday, a New Mexico jury reached a $375 million verdict against Meta after a seven-week trial that focused on whether the social media company knowingly harmed children’s mental health and facilitated child sexual exploitation through its algorithms. And just before recording, another verdict came down in a jury trial in California about whether Facebook and YouTube are too addictive in a way that harms an individual plaintiff in that case. Several other similar civil cases are set to go to trial in the coming months. What do we make of these verdicts, and do they signal a turning tide against social media companies for the algorithms that make them both profitable and (potentially) addictive?“SAVE-ing Face.” President Trump and Republican congressional leaders went back and forth this week over a deal that would put forward a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, or at least less controversial parts of it, despite Trump’s threats not to sign any pieces of legislation until Congress passes his SAVE America Act. Trump views the SAVE America Act as vindication for his criticisms of the 2020 Election, but Republicans in the Senate have hedged and resisted his calls to blow up the filibuster in order to pass it. Instead, they now appear to have a deal in place that will allow less controversial parts of the funding for DHS to go forward—and for the funding for the most controversial parts, particularly ICE and removal operations, to go forward through reconciliation on what is likely to be a party line vote, along with select chunks of that SAVE America Act. Why is Trump so determined to pass the SAVE America Act? And what does the compromise he now appears to have reached with Senate Republicans mean for its future?“Poly Wants a Crack-up.” Flight monitors, pizza place trackers, and Google Earth—the past few years have brought open source intelligence, better known as “OSINT,” into vogue. Accounts on X have racked up millions of followers by “monitoring the situation” for news events spanning from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to natural disasters. But this explosion of OSINT accounts has brought a wave of disinformation, and coincides with the growth of online prediction markets, such as Polymarket and Kalshi, whose bettors use OSINT to gain an advantage — and, at times, to manipulate the results. How has OSINT contributed to the online media landscape? And how has it hurt it?In object lessons, Tyler engages in some classic log-rolling with a recommendation of the new podcast, “Who Blew Up the Guidestones?” Molly digs even deeper into her collection of curiosities to find her vintage “Nuke ‘Em ’Til They Glow” hat. Scott expertly sidesteps sports gambling issues by distracting us with delicious baked good from Seylou. And Renée survives a demanding travel schedule by drinking a brandy Old Fashioned and brushing up on her knowledge of K-pop.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Natalie Orpett, and Ariane Tabatabai to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:
“Keeping It On the Strait and Narrow.” Three weeks into the U.S. and Israel’s air campaign against Iran, ship traffic through the critical Strait of Hormuz remains at a virtual stop, sending crude oil prices north of $100 a barrel. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said last week that vessels are safe to sail through the strait, but continued attacks on tankers suggest otherwise. Some neighboring Gulf states, among others, are growing antsy that U.S. strikes won’t go far enough in preventing attacks by Iran. What do we make of these developments, and how will it impact how other countries are navigating the broader conflict?“‘Nein’ to Five.” U.S. efforts to secure European support for efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz have fallen on deaf ears, with German officials describing it as “not our war” and far outside the obligations imposed by NATO’s Article 5 and other defense commitments. In response, President Trump said that he was “disappointed” in NATO and once again hinted that he might exit it. It’s the latest nadir in a precipitous decline in transatlantic relations over the past three months. How much worse can things get? And what could it mean for the future of the broader alliance?“(Un)Lawful Good?” A U.S. strike on what turned out to be an elementary school in southern Iran in the earliest days of the U.S. military campaign there has put a new focus on decisions by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to scale back rules and processes meant to reduce harm to civilians in armed conflict. Hegseth has called the rules of engagement “stupid” and has said he wants to give military commanders “maximum authority on the battlefield.” He’s also repeatedly called for “no quarter” in Iran and other contexts—an order that, if taken literally, would itself be a violation of the laws of armed conflict. Exactly how far has Hegseth unraveled the Pentagon’s rules of engagement? And what could the real world consequences be in Iran and elsewhere?In object lessons, Natalie (or rather, her son) is cooking up a delicious recommendation for the culinarily curious kid in your life with Raddish Kids (hey there, Raddish Kids, Rational Security is looking for sponsors…). Ari is feasting on (and hoarding) the indigenous Taiwanese pepper, Maqaw. Scott is traveling in style and efficiency with his portable office kit, consisting of his fave iPad case and the Anker Power Bank (while we hate to sound like a broken record, uh, hey there, Anker, Rational Security is looking for sponsors…). And hey there, girlies, Ben is doing Ben things while getting ready for court.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Kate Klonick, Molly Roberts, and Troy Edwards to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:
“MisAnthropic.” On Monday, Anthropic filed a civil complaint in the Northern District of California and a petition for hearing at the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit over the Department of Defense’s designation of the frontier artificial intelligence company as a “supply chain risk.” The litigation capped off weeks of building tensions between Anthropic and Pentagon officials over the firm’s two ethical red lines for the Defense Department and its use of its AI model, Claude, specifically around widespread surveillance of Americans and the use of AI and autonomous weapons. What exactly are the Pentagon’s grounds for designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk, and how does Anthropic argue that doing so is inconsistent with the law? And what might the implications be for the AI industry as a whole?“The Mashhadian Candidate.” Fears that Iran would respond to the ongoing Israeli-U.S. military campaign through overseas terrorism have come to a head this week, as reports emerged that U.S. intelligence had detected an encrypted message being transmitted from Iran that may serve as “an operational trigger” for assets sitting outside of the country. What do we know about Iran’s involvement in past clandestine operations, including terrorism? And what does it mean that this is all happening at a moment when the Justice Department and FBI have lost so many of their experienced national security personnel?“Maricopa-calypse Now.” Federal investigators have ramped up several inquiries that appear to be aimed at longstanding—and, thus far, unsubstantiated—allegations of fraud in the 2020 election that are particularly popular with President Trump and his closest supporters. Last month, FBI agents executed a search warrant on Fulton County’s election office and confiscated ballots and voting equipment used in 2020. Last week, the FBI reportedly subpoenaed records from a conservative Arizona legislator over the state senate’s audit of the 2020 election results in Maricopa County. And days later, the Department of Homeland Security’s Homeland Security Investigations office (or HSI) requested records from Arizona state officials regarding their own investigations into alleged 2020 malfeasance. What should we make of these developments? And at what point should we be concerned about the federal government's engagement in these sorts of matters in advance of the upcoming 2026 midterms?This week’s object lessons are all-consuming. Kate is celebrating online legal analysis by drinking from her Balkinization mug. Troy is lamenting yet another slate of firings at the FBI by drinking from his EX FED mug. Scott, finding himself with unexpected free time at Union Station, devoured Barbara Tuchman’s “A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century.” And Molly introduces us to the texturally triggering cherimoya.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Daniel Byman, and Ari Tabatabai for an in-depth discussion of the U.S. military operations against Iran, including:
“Isn’t it Iran-ic.” Trump’s decision to join Israel in removing Ayatollah Khamanei reflects a deep reversal by the president, who has spent years criticizing his predecessors’ own experiences with regime change and other overseas adventurism. What drove Trump to proceed this time, after stopping short twice in the past year? What can we learn from the way the Trump administration has proceeded? And how far will Trump let things go?“Bibi’s Big Adventure.” Regime change in Iran is something Israel and the Arab Gulf states have advocated for frequently in the past. But they had all adopted a more cautious and even conciliatory posture toward Iran in the months before the current offensive, at least in public. How has the region approached this conflict? And what will it do moving forward?“MIGA.” The death of Ayatollah Khamenei is a major shift in Iran, but we don’t know where it is going to lead. One concern that people have always had about regime change in Iran is that it will be highly destabilizing, resulting in a failed state in a crucial corner of the Middle East. On the other end, other people have asserted that removing the Ayatollah and his regime will give Iran the opportunity to flourish back into a democracy, or at least something closer to a state that’s more stable and free than Iran has been for the last several decades. Between the two is a mass spectrum of possibilities. What does the future hold for Iran in the post-Ayatollah era, if that’s the era that we’re heading into?In object lessons, Ben is vibe-coding his way through Lawfare’s litigation tracker, as well as vibing his way through The Rest is History’s four-part series, Revolution in Iran. Dan is war-gaming his way through the attack on Iran with Next War: Iran. Scott is consuming as much Iran content as he can get his hands on with (another) Scott Anderson’s “King of Kings,” Roy Mottahedeh’s “The Mantle of the Prophet,” Gary Sick’s “All Fall Down,” and Dutch documentary “The Birthday,” finally discovered online by Lawfare’s own Anna Hickey. And Ari, not to be outdone in Iran content, recommends the graphic novel “Persepolis,” but really is escaping it all with Final Fantasy VII Remake.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott was joined by Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien, Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Roberts, and University of Virginia Professor of Law Paul Stephan to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:
“Textual Healing.” On Friday, a 6-3 Supreme Court majority brought an end to at least the current iteration of President Trump’s controversial tariff policies, ruling that language in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (or IEEPA) authorizing the “regulation of…importation” doesn’t include the authority to impose tariffs. That said, President Trump himself has already indicated that he intends to reinstate many of the tariffs he had installed using IEEPA under other statutory authorities. How big a setback is this for the Trump administration’s trade policies? And what might it mean for other aspects of its policy agenda?“Mayhem in Mexico.” Over the weekend, an elite unit of the Mexican army killed one of the country’s most powerful drug kingpins, Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, also known as “El Mencho.” His syndicate, the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, immediately retaliated, through attacks on Mexican security forces, roadblocks throughout the country, and other measures intended to terrorize the public, particularly in areas frequented by American and Western tourists. The decision to move against El Mencho followed an intense pressure campaign by the Trump administration, which has pushed Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum to take a hard stand against the cartels. Should this be seen as a win for the Trump administration? Or Sheinbaum? And what could the long-term implications be for the U.S.-Mexico relationship?“Clap if You Believe.” On Tuesday, President Trump delivered his annual State of the Union address, the longest of its kind. Many had braced for a contentious speech, expecting Trump to ridicule the justices seated in front of him and potentially even announce strikes on Iran. But Trump appeared to pull his punches on both of those fronts—he instead saved his harshest words for congressional Democrats and focused on laying out a rose-colored picture of the state of the country. How effective was Trump’s speech? And what does it tell us about the current state of his second presidency?In object lessons, Tyler just has this strange sense that you will enjoy the Otherworld podcast. Molly (and her dog) find comfort in the soft, squishy claws of Cthulhu. Scott eased his travel woes with a twist on the Vieux Carre at Birch & Bloom in Charlottesville. And Paul mixed his object lesson with three parts: Peter Suderman’s Cocktails if you’re into all things shaken and stirred; Mark Galeotti's podcast, In Moscow’s Shadow, if you’re into all things Russia-related; and Dan Wang’s New York Times Best Seller book, “Breakneck,” if you’re into all things China-related.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his foreign-policy-minded colleagues Daniel Byman, Michael Feinberg, and Ari Tabatabai to talk through some recent big news stories around the world, including:
“Beer Hall Push-back.” Over the weekend, a raft of bipartisan U.S. and European officials headed to Bavaria for the annual Munich Security Conference. Last year, Vice President J.D. Vance gave a barnburner of a speech, accusing European allies of restraining free speech and giving succor to the European far right. This year, Secretary of State Marco Rubio gave a more conciliatory set of remarks that nonetheless signaled that there were some fundamental changes happening in the relationship. For their part, European leaders mostly seemed to be on board with that as they increasingly leaned into the public stance that it was time for the continent to stand on its own, independent of the United States, although how feasible that will be and on what timeline remain the big questions. What should we make of the different remarks we heard from the conference and the broader messages the two sides are sending to each other? And is this a sign of an impending divorce or a different sort of shift in the U.S.-European transatlantic relationship? “Rial Talk.” American and Iranian officials met again this week in Geneva to negotiate an end to the Islamic Republic’s nuclear weapons program in exchange for an easing or elimination of U.S. sanctions on Iran. The negotiations took place amidst continued saber rattling by both President Trump and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who threatened in a speech ahead of the talks to sink U.S. warships in the region if Iran came under attack. Nonetheless, some participants in the negotiations—particularly the mediators from Oman—seemed optimistic that the two sides were getting closer to some sort of common understanding about how they might move forward. But U.S. military assets are continuing to accumulate in the region, leading some to conclude that a military operation may yet be on the horizon. Is there space for a deal? Or iare we going to see another war in Iran?“Xi Who Must Not Be Named.” A year in, the second Trump administration has not proven to be the China hawk that many expected. Far from drawing a hard line on all things China as the first Trump administration often seemed to do, U.S. officials have instead been surprisingly quiet and conciliatory in regard to China, at least outside the trade context. This has remained true even as reports have emerged of Xi Jinping purging his military of non-loyalists, modernizing China’s nuclear arsenal, and building more submarines—all steps with the potential to significantly upset the balance of power in Asia and beyond. What is the real logic underlying the Trump administration's seemingly quixotic approach to China, and where might it lead the broader relationship between the two major powers?In object lessons, Dan is delighting in John Company, a social-climbing, backroom-dealing, hostile-bargaining board game to, you know, escape the harsh realities of the real world. Ari enthusiastically recommends the Broadway adaptation of Death Becomes Her, which somehow manages to be even quirkier than the original film. Scott has been sucked into the social media abyss by Jess and Quinn’s corny, absurdist, and pun-oriented humor. And Mike offers an anti-object-lesson warning: the “Poetry for Kids” series is not, in fact, reliably for kids.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes, who recently returned from Ukraine, and Lawfare’s Ukraine Fellow Anastasiia Lapatina, to go through the latest developments in that country, including:
“Cold War.” Russia’s ongoing winter campaign against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure has created a humanitarian crisis in many parts of the country. In Kyiv, at least one major power plant has been completely destroyed, and many more energy sites have been damaged. Numerous other parts of the country are without power and heating during a season when temperatures regularly dip below zero degrees Fahrenheit. What do these attacks show about the dynamics of the conflict? And what can be done to curb their effects?“Stuck in the Sand.” U.S.-backed negotiations between Russia and Ukraine—which continued in Abu Dhabi this past week—remain at an impasse, without tangible progress other than a prisoner of war exchange that led to the release of 157 Ukrainians from Russian captivity. Russia continues to demand that Ukraine surrender a large swath of territory in its eastern Donbas region, which Kyiv says is a red line. Meanwhile, President Zelensky has suggested that the United States is pushing the sides to end the war by summer 2026 — perhaps because of the U.S. midterm elections set to take place shortly thereafter. What is the state of the negotiations at this point? Is this a reasonable expectation by the administration? Or are there any areas for potential agreement in the short or medium term?“(P)eye in the Sky?”: The war in Ukraine is arguably the first to be fought in substantial part through drones. Not only has the conflict helped showcase the capabilities of drones, but it’s spurred rapid development in the technology behind them—and methods that might be used to defeat them. What did Ben learn about these technologies on his trip? And what can it tell us about the future of warfare?In object lessons, Ben departs from his signature dog shirts to shirts of a more subversive nature. Nastya pleads to the power of your inner light in helping the families of Kyiv who are suffering through the energy crisis. And Scott encourages you to keep reading and caring about the War in Ukraine.
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Molly Roberts, Michael Feinberg, and Troy Edwards to talk through the week’s big warrant-related national security news, including:
“Tulsi Went Down to Georgia, She Was Looking for a Vote to Steal.” This past week, the FBI executed a warrant to search Fulton County’s election center for ballots and equipment related to the 2020 election, with the help of an unlikely senior administration official: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who was reportedly there in-person at the order of President Trump. Observers are concerned that the search is the beginning of a broader effort to relitigate the 2020 election—especially as Trump calls for Republicans in Congress to “nationalize elections” in advance of the November mid-terms. What do we know about the legal basis for this search? And what does it tell us about what the Trump administration has planned for November?“I Hear the Jury’s Still Out on the Fourth Amendment.” Over the past week, whistleblowers have revealed that ICE has issued a series of internal memos to agents advising that they do not need judicial warrants to detain or search the homes of people suspected of being undocumented immigrants. Instead, ICE has attempted to side-step the regular judicial process by suggesting that agents only need an administrative warrant, a controversial move that will almost certainly be challenged in court. What do we think of ICE’s decision to shift to such a legally dubious policy, and where do we expect it to go from here?“Ex Post Justification.” Last month, the FBI conducted a search on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson as part of an investigation into alleged leaks by a Defense Department contractor. During the search, agents seized Natanson’s personal and professional devices, which drew concern from media outlets and civil liberty groups over potential First Amendment and privacy violations. A magistrate judge has now ordered that the FBI cannot access Natanson’s materials at least for now, while some of these issues are litigated. How should federal law enforcement balance the need to conduct leak investigations with press freedoms? And is this case on the right side of the line?In object lessons, sometimes all you can do is cry: Molly is remembering better days for the Washington Post and mourning the fall of a once-great paper. Sometimes all you can do is get lost in the music: Mike is celebrating the still-great Miles Davis with the long-awaited release of The Complete Miles Davis Live at the Plugged Nickel 1965 on vinyl. Sometimes all you can do is laugh: Scott is delighting in his former State Department colleague’s new Substack, Ridiculocracy. And sometimes, all you can do is wear something fabulous: Troy is modeling the new wardrobe must-have for the “Government in Exile.”
To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
- Laat meer zien
