Scott R. Anderson

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

Join Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Scott R. Anderson and Dan Byman from Brookings, Oula A. Alrifai, a Syrian specialist, and Leah West, a Canadian expert on ISIS detainees, as they dissect the chaotic aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal from Syria. They cover the fallout of Turkish incursions, the humanitarian crisis facing families, and the precarious state of Kurdish forces against ISIS. Their insights illuminate the complex geopolitical dynamics and serious implications for regional stability.

Join Scott Anderson, a national security law expert, Roger Parloff, a political and legal analyst, and Anna Bower, seasoned in legal discourse, as they dissect significant legal challenges faced by the Trump administration. They debate two pivotal court rulings on tariffs and migrant humanitarian status, revealing the complexities of executive power. The conversation also covers the implications of Supreme Court rulings on immigration and corporate responses to evolving trade policies. Their engaging dialogue blends humor with crucial legal insights.

In this engaging discussion, Dan Byman, a terrorism expert from Georgetown, Ryan Berg, director of the Americas Program at CSIS, and legal analyst Scott R. Anderson dive into the U.S.'s new counterdrug strategies. They examine the implications of lethal strikes against drug smuggling boats and the challenges of framing drug trafficking under international law. The trio debates the importance of host governments in combatting cartels, the risks of retaliation against U.S. forces, and whether a counterterrorism approach can effectively address the persistent demand for drugs in America.

Scott R. Anderson, a national security law expert, joins Dana Stuster, a foreign policy editor, and Loren Voss, a public service fellow, to dissect the U.S. military strike on Venezuela. They delve into the legal ramifications and justifications for targeting Nicolás Maduro, exploring the balance between law enforcement and military action. The discussion also touches on the geopolitical implications, potential U.S. policy aims like oil access, and the risks that such actions pose to international norms. Their analysis raises questions about whether the U.S. is effectively at war with Venezuela.

In this lively discussion, Scott R. Anderson, a Brookings Fellow, Dmitri Alperovitch, Co-Founder of Silverado Policy Accelerator, Kori Schake from the American Enterprise Institute, and Natan Sachs, Director of the Center for Middle East Policy, dive into critical national security issues as they relate to the 2024 election. They dissect Kamala Harris's and Donald Trump's differing foreign policies, especially regarding Ukraine, Israel, and NATO. The panel also explores the implications of these approaches on future U.S. aid and global alliances.

The podcast features Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson and leading court reporters Roger Parloff and Anna Bower. They discuss removal proceedings in Georgia, a proposed gag order for Trump in Washington, mishandling of classified information by Trump in Florida, and the wave of litigation seeking to disqualify Trump under the 14th Amendment.

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

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

Quinta Jurecic, a Senior Editor at Lawfare with expertise in constitutional law, joins Natalie Orpett, an Executive Editor focused on national security law, Amelia Wilson, a Clinical Professor specializing in immigration, and Scott R. Anderson, a scholar of geopolitics. They tackle pressing inquiries from the public, discussing the risks of AI in military contexts and the implications of Section 230 reform. They also explore the potential for shifting U.S. military deployments and the future of Guantanamo detainees, providing clarity on complex legal issues and current events.