The Lawfare Podcast

In a lively discussion, experts tackle the Supreme Court's decision on Rebecca Slaughter's FTC case and the implications of potentially overruling Humphrey's Executor. They dissect James Comey's indictment and explore the reopening of old leak investigations, probing into political motivations. The podcast also highlights challenges to warrantless detentions of migrants in D.C., while updates on various litigation cases keep the conversation dynamic. Tune in for insightful analysis and audience questions that cover a broad spectrum of legal battles.

David Pozen, a constitutional law expert at Columbia Law School, dives deep into the complexities of the war on drugs. He discusses how constitutional doctrines have failed to curb drug prohibitions, despite their implications for personal autonomy and equality. Pozen critiques the punitive nature of current drug policies and highlights the racial injustices involved. He also explores the impact of recent political shifts towards decriminalization and the significance of privacy arguments that have struggled in court. A thought-provoking examination of law and society!

In this discussion, Matt Perault, a technology policy director at UNC, and Kate Klonick, a law professor specializing in platform governance, dive into the Supreme Court's recent dismissal of Murthy v. Missouri. They unpack the concept of 'jawboning'—government pressure on social media—and debate its implications for free speech. The duo analyzes the Court's standing ruling, critiques the case's political origins, and explores the complexities of coercion versus persuasion in government-platform relations. Can executive action address these challenges?

Gavin Wilde, a Nonresident Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and adjunct lecturer at Johns Hopkins, tackles the intricate world of deepfakes. He explores their historical context, arguing that perceptions of deepfakes often stem from past media anxieties. Wilde discusses the limited impact of deepfakes in recent elections and emphasizes the need for a thoughtful approach beyond technology, focusing on issues like non-consensual imagery and voice scams.

Join legal scholars Kate Klonick and Eric Columbus as they dive into the implications of free speech amid intense political pressure following Charlie Kirk's assassination. They explore the First Amendment challenges sparked by calls for censorship in media. The duo also unpacks the murky details behind the U.S.-China TikTok deal and its impact on national security. From jawboning tactics to potential legal remedies, they illuminate the intersection of law and technology, while also sharing personal reflections and cultural recommendations.

Renée DiResta, an Associate Research Professor at Georgetown, and Jess Miers, a visiting law professor at Akron, dive deep into the mental health risks generative AI poses to children. They discuss how AI can amplify existing vulnerabilities and the critical need for media literacy. The conversation also touches on legal responses to AI technology, including age verification policies and potential government mandates. With insights into ongoing lawsuits and the nuances of AI safety measures, they shine a light on the evolving landscape of AI regulation.

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.

Minna Ålander, an expert on Nordic-Baltic security, joins Mykhailo Soldatenko, a Harvard scholar specializing in international law, to dissect recent Russian air incursions into NATO territory. They discuss whether NATO's responses have been proportional and the legal implications of these actions. Key points include the intentionality behind airspace violations, the high thresholds for NATO obligations, and the U.S. government's hesitancy in response. Their insights provide a deep dive into the complexities of military strategy and legal frameworks in the current geopolitical climate.

A lively discussion delves into Kash Patel's fiery congressional testimony and its implications on personnel lawsuits. The podcast explores a significant injunction safeguarding Guatemalan minors from deportation, revealing skepticism towards the DOJ's claims. With a focus on Lisa Cook's removal challenge and the complexities of FBI firings, the conversation also highlights Georgia's Supreme Court controversies and challenges within immigration litigation. The hosts offer keen insights into the intersection of law and politics.

From September 18, 2024: Jane Bambauer, Professor at Levin College of Law; Ramya Krishnan, Senior Staff Attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute and a lecturer in law at Columbia Law School; Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Senior Editor at Lawfare, join Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor at St. Thomas University College of Law and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to break down the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ hearing in TikTok v. Garland, in which a panel of judges assessed the constitutionality of the TikTok bill.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.