The Lawfare Podcast

Anastasiia Lapatina, a Lawfare Ukraine Fellow and journalist, teams up with Eric Ciaramella, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, to dive into the complexities of the Russia-Ukraine peace discussions. They dissect the controversial 28-point plan, addressing the U.S. policy's unpredictability and its implications for Ukraine. Lapatina reveals Ukraine's political tension amid the negotiations, while Ciaramella critiques the vague provisions favoring Russia. The duo emphasizes the urgent need for robust security guarantees and clearer strategies for Ukraine's defense.

Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes talks with Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Senior Editor Michael Feinberg about their recent Lawfare article examining a little-noticed piece of legislation that was slipped into the deal to end the government shutdown—one that gives senators a civil right of action to sue the U.S. government when their phone or metadata is accessed without notice, with a payout of $500,000 per “instance.”They discuss the potential consequences of the law for surveillance, separation of powers, and the relationship between Congress and law enforcement. It’s not just about senators getting paid, though the potential price tag is staggering. It’s about whether a broad, retroactive, and loosely defined cause of action undermines critical investigative tools and erodes the integrity of national security and criminal investigations.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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Roger Parloff, a Senior Editor at Lawfare, and James Pearce, a Contributor with insights into constitutional issues, dive into the judge's dismissal of indictments against James Comey and Letitia James. They explore the implications of Lindsey Halligan's unlawful appointment under federal law and analyze the Appointments Clause's impact. The discussion also touches on potential government appeals, the broader trend of disqualified interim U.S. Attorneys, and the challenges of re-filing charges in different jurisdictions.

A judge orders the Trump administration to end National Guard deployments in D.C., while legal minds discuss the implications. Prosecutions of Letitia James and James Comey are examined, highlighting allegations of misconduct. The panel delves into various litigation across circuits, including a Tennessee injunction against National Guard actions. They also unpack the complexities surrounding immigration cases and university funding lawsuits. Tensions rise as insights into grand jury proceedings and political motivations emerge.

Jonathan Lord, Director of the Middle East Security Program at CNAS, shares insights on the recent Iran-Saudi deal brokered by China. He discusses the historical tensions between the two nations and the implications of their renewed diplomatic relations. Lord debates China's role as either a mediator or a narrative driver. He also explores the dual Saudi strategy of engagement with Iran while enhancing military capabilities. Additionally, the challenges of achieving stability in Yemen and the potential impact of China’s involvement are examined.

Clara Hendrickson, a politics reporter at the Detroit Free Press, shares her insights on Michigan's legal battles stemming from the 2020 election. She details the charges against 16 fake electors involved in Trump's attempts to overturn results and explains the broader implications of these prosecutions. Clara discusses the roles of local GOP figures, conspiracy theories specific to Michigan, and high-profile cases of unauthorized voting machine access. Their conversation highlights Michigan's pivotal role in the fight for electoral accountability.

Amb. Jeffrey Feltman, a seasoned diplomat with a rich history at the U.N., teams up with Joel Braunold, Managing Director at the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace, to dissect the newly adopted U.N. Security Council Resolution 2803. They delve into its unusual elements, the implications for Palestinian self-determination, and the political calculations of the U.S. and regional actors. The duo also explores the role of the PLO, Israel's reactions, and the potential challenges in implementing disarmament and reform. A compelling discussion on a pivotal moment in peace efforts!

Anastasiia Lapatina, a Lawfare Kyiv fellow and expert on Ukraine's energy sector, shares her insights on the ongoing Russian attacks on Ukrainian power infrastructure and a significant corruption scandal involving alleged kickbacks in the energy sector. She discusses the impact of energy insecurity in daily life, Ukraine’s strategic counterattacks, and the implications for President Zelensky amidst public outrage. Lapatina also analyzes the political fallout from these issues, highlighting the complexities of anti-corruption efforts in wartime.

Join Molly Roberts, a Senior Editor known for her keen legal analysis, Roger Parloff, an experienced courtroom journalist, and Anna Bower, who provides on-the-ground insights from the recent hearings. They dive into the complexities surrounding James Comey’s prosecution, discussing key aspects like vindictive prosecution and the implications of a potential dismissal. Anna highlights irregularities in grand jury presentations, while Roger shares insights on contempt proceedings related to deportations. The panel also previews future hearings that could shake up the legal landscape.

Roger Parloff, Senior Editor at Lawfare with expertise in legal analysis, joins Anna Bower, another Senior Editor focused on legal and political developments, and Michael Feinberg, a former federal investigator. They discuss a significant ruling allowing James Comey access to grand jury errors, which could impact his prosecution. The team also delves into the political tug-of-war over the Epstein files, highlighting a surprising shift in White House support for transparency. Lastly, they critique the right-wing media's handling of investigations and its ramifications.