The Week That Was

Eric Columbus unpacked the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the Broadview, Illinois, ICE protestors, from its start with Operation Midway Blitz to its final hearing on May 21, where a federal judge dismissed the charges. Columbus argued that the prosecution of the “Broadview Four” reflects the growing politicization and overreach of federal immigration enforcement under the Trump administration and underscores broader concerns about the erosion of the rule of law at the Justice Department.

Anna Bower and Columbus unpacked President Trump’s settlement agreement in his lawsuit against the IRS, the legal framework for the recently announced Anti-Weaponization Fund, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s order that purports to extend immunity from government liability to Trump and his family, and more. Bower and Columbus framed these recent executive actions as part of a larger effort under the Trump administration to strengthen the presidency’s oversight of the Justice Department.

On Lawfare Daily, Columbus joined Benjamin Wittes to unpack the settlement in the Trump family’s lawsuit against the IRS and the Department of Treasury that has led to the creation of the $1.776 Anti-Weaponization Fund and a promise of blanket immunity from government liability for Trump and his family.

Aziz Huq explained that the Trump administration’s Anti-Weaponization Fund is not only a legally questionable use of the Justice Department’s settlement authority, but also reflects a broader historical pattern of administrations using federal settlements for political purposes. Huq contended that any meaningful remedy will likely require congressional action, as courts may lack a clear path to challenge the fund.

On Lawfare Live, Wittes sat down with Roger Parloff, Bower, and Columbus to discuss the Justice Department’s Anti-Weaponization Fund, oral argument in Anthropic’s lawsuit at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and more.

On Lawfare No Bull, Marissa Wang shared audio from the oral argument in Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Department of Defense and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for their designation of the artificial intelligence (AI) company as a supply chain risk.

On Lawfare Daily, Wittes sat down with Bower, Columbus, and Parloff to discuss Judge J.P. Boulee’s denial of Fulton County’s motion for the return of 2020 presidential election ballots seized by the FBI, Judge Colleen McMahon's order to rescind the DOGE-backed cancellation of humanities grants, oral argument in Mark Kelly v. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and more.

On Rational Security, Scott R. Anderson sat down with Kari Heerman and Wittes to unpack Trump’s trip to Beijing to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping, rising U.S. pressure on Cuba, another legal strikedown of Trump’s tariffs, and more.

Wang shared the unsealed superseding indictment charging former Cuban President Raúl Castro and five Cuban air force pilots for their alleged roles in the shoot down of two civilian flown planes in 1996, killing four U.S. nationals.

Pavlina Pavlova, Christopher Painter, and Nick Ashton-Hart examined how Russia has failed to fully impose its authoritarian vision on the substance of international cyber agreements, despite its successful push for negotiations with the UN. The trio contended that, while democratic states have so far blocked many of the most restrictive proposals, these states must develop a proactive cyber governance agenda focused on international cooperation and humanitarian values to respond to Russia and China’s efforts.

Dmytro Soldatenko argued that Russia’s underlying goal in international negotiations is to normalize its invasion of Ukraine by dismantling the legal record of international law that defines the war as unlawful aggression. Soldatenko contended that Ukraine’s strongest leverage lies in sustaining this international law framework.

On Lawfare Daily, Antonia Senior joined Michael Feinberg to discuss Senior’s new book, “Stalin's Apostles: The Cambridge Five and the Making of the Soviet Empire,” on the history of the Cambridge spy ring. The pair unpacked the history of the Cambridge Five, how they were recruited, how the group was discovered, and their lasting effect on the culture of espionage.

Omar Mohammed argued that the U.S. should maintain sustained pressure on Iranian-backed militias embedded within Iraq because these groups are Tehran’s strongest remaining source of regional influence following the conclusion of Operation Epic Fury. Mohammed explained that weakening the militias through sanctions and economic leverage is necessary to preserve Iraqi sovereignty and prevent further Iranian influence over Iraq’s political and security systems.

On Lawfare Daily, Loren Voss sat down with Jeffrey Stern to discuss Stern’s new book, “The Warhead: The Quest to Build the Perfect Weapon in the Age of Modern Warfare.” Their conversation covered the development of the Paveway bomb, the importance of precision weapons to modern warfare, the War Powers Resolution, and more.

In the latest edition of Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Essay series, John Severini and Stephen Biddle explained how factors such as training and organizational adaptation can determine naval combat outcomes by drawing on contrasting World War II battles to assess modern U.S.-China naval competition.

On Lawfare Daily, Daniel Bell joined Feinberg to discuss Bell’s new book, “Why Ancient Chinese Political Thought Matters: Four Dialogues on China’s Past, Present, and Future.” The pair discussed the ongoing influence of ancient Chinese political theory on modern China, its domestic debates, and more.

Alison Gocke and Ashley Deeks argued that China’s energy strategy, which prioritizes clean energy technologies over oil and gas, offers national security advantages over the U.S.’s continued reliance on fossil fuels. Gocke and Deeks described how China’s electrostate is more insulated from volatile global oil markets and gives Beijing stronger geopolitical leverage, surveillance opportunities, and potential control over foreign infrastructure compared to the U.S.’s petrostate approach.

Yonathan A. Arbel and Matthew Tokson explained that framing U.S.-China AI competition as a “race” is descriptively flawed and strategically dangerous. The pair unpacked how the race narrative encourages deregulation, weakens AI safety standards, and escalates geopolitical tensions while overlooking alternative, collaboration-focused approaches.

Joel Christoph examined the authorities that the EU’s AI expertise center stands to gain in August 2026 under the EU AI Act and argued that the office’s early enforcement decisions will determine if major AI firms treat the EU’s regulatory framework as a serious compliance regime.

In the latest edition of the Seriously Risky Business cybersecurity newsletter, Tom Uren examined the European government’s shift away from international encrypted messaging apps for domestic platforms where they can maintain sovereign control, the recently released details on an early 21st century cyber operations campaign designed to slow Iranian nuclear development, and more.

Cullen O’Keefe argued that Congress should require the executive branch to obtain explicit congressional approval before deploying advanced AI systems in high-risk governmental functions. O’Keefe explained that large-scale governmental AI systems could weaken traditional checks on executive power and threaten democratic accountability.

On Scaling Laws, Kevin Frazier sat down with Cathy O'Neil to discuss the capabilities and limitations of algorithmic auditing, how organizations measure and mitigate bias, where auditing should fit into broader governance frameworks, and more.

Also on Scaling Laws, Frazier sat down with John McAuliff to discuss the ongoing debates around data centers at the state level, including what state legislatures are doing to help counties negotiate with data center developers, why their development is a key issue for voters, and more.

And that was the week that was.