Lawfare Archive: Foreign Agents and the Barrack Indictment
Sep 29, 2024
auto_awesome
Thomas Barrack, former advisor to the Trump campaign, faces a criminal trial for allegedly acting as a foreign agent of the UAE. Natalie Orpett, executive editor of Lawfare, joins to unpack the legal implications surrounding this high-profile case. They delve into the connections between UAE influence and U.S. policy decisions, including cabinet appointments and immigration. The discussion highlights vital legal frameworks like FARA, the dangers of foreign interference, and what Barrack's trial could mean for future national security efforts.
The indictment of Tom Barrack underscores critical legal distinctions between foreign influence and espionage under U.S. law, particularly Section 951.
The ongoing focus on foreign agents like Barrack highlights heightened national security measures and the need for transparency in U.S. political relationships.
Deep dives
Understanding Section 951 and Its Implications
Section 951 of the U.S. code addresses the actions of foreign agents in influencing U.S. policy, distinguishing itself from the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The Department of Justice is utilizing Section 951 to pursue legal action against individuals, such as Tom Barrick, making allegations of acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government. This statute has a lower burden of proof compared to FARA and is typically associated with cases involving espionage or unauthorized influence. The discussions highlight the importance of distinguishing between lawful diplomatic engagement and illegal foreign influence, with Barrick’s case exemplifying the complexities involved in determining such distinctions.
The Case Against Tom Barrick
Tom Barrick has been indicted for allegedly acting as a back channel for the UAE, influencing U.S. policy during the Trump administration. The indictment includes specific instances, such as his involvement in shaping an op-ed for Fortune and providing input on Trump's foreign policy stance, aiming to secure favorable treatment from the U.S. government. Barrick's actions exemplify concerns regarding foreign influence, especially considering the magnitude of financial rewards tied to such engagements, with Colony Capital reportedly raising substantial funds from Emirati sources post-election. The case not only investigates Barrick's conduct but also broader implications for national security and foreign relations.
The Distinction Between Influence and Espionage
The legal proceedings highlight the difference between foreign influence and espionage, particularly in the context of managing U.S. foreign relations. While espionage involves the collection of intelligence and secrets, foreign influence, as described under Section 951, focuses on attempts to sway U.S. policy at the behest of a foreign government. The nuances of proving such influence present challenges in court, especially without a clear contractual agreement establishing a formal agent relationship. This ambiguity raises questions about acceptable diplomatic avenues and the potential for legitimate back-channel negotiations that do not violate U.S. laws.
The Broader Context of Foreign Influence in U.S. Politics
Concerns over foreign influence have surged in recent years, especially in the wake of investigations into Russian interference in U.S. elections. The Justice Department’s focus on cases like Barrick's reflects a concerted effort to enforce laws governing foreign influence, with a notable increase in FARA registrations since 2016. The ongoing legal battles signify a critical moment for national security strategies, emphasizing transparency in foreign relationships within U.S. political environments. Understanding these dynamics is essential as they impact not just individual defendants, but the broader framework of diplomatic engagements and the integrity of U.S. democratic institutions.
From September 21, 2022: This past Monday, the criminal trial of Thomas Barrack began in federal court in the Eastern District of New York. Barrack, who served as an informal advisor to the 2016 Trump campaign and then as chair of Trump's inaugural committee, is alleged to have acted as a foreign agent of the United Arab Emirates. According to the indictment, Barrack acted as a back channel for the UAE to influence U.S. foreign policy.
Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Alex Iftimie, a partner at the law firm Morrison Foerster, and a former Department of Justice attorney specializing in national security matters, including the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, and related statutes. They discussed the case against Barrack, the significance of the charges to broader enforcement strategy, and why foreign influence matters for U.S. national security.