J. Dana Stuster unpacked the memorandum of understanding negotiated by the U.S. and Iran to end their war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Stuster highlighted what the deal includes, what it leaves out, and potential obstacles to its longevity.
On Lawfare Daily, Anastasiia Lapatina sat down with Chris Powers, the Kyiv Independent’s Brussels Correspondent, to discuss the recent progress in Ukraine’s bid to join the European Union and the many political dramas that surround that process both in Kyiv and in Brussels.
On Rational Security this week, Scott R. Anderson sat down with Alan Rozenshtein, Tyler McBrien, Julia Curlee, and Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including the deal to end the war in Iran, Anthropic’s abrupt shutdown of its top AI models, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s rescinding of Biden-era reports on Havana Syndrome, and more.
Thomas Kent reviewed Martin Moore and Thomas Colley’s book, “Dictating Reality: The Global Battle to Control the News,” and its analysis of how authoritarian leaders, from Russia’s Vladimir Putin to Mexico’s Andrés Manuel López Obrador use the media and misinformation to advance their agendas.
On Lawfare Daily, Roger Parloff spoke with Brendan Ballou, the founder and CEO of the Public Integrity Project, about his organization’s lawsuit that sought to enjoin the Ultimate Fighting Championship cage-fighting event on the White House’s South Lawn.
George Croner examined the judicial precedents behind a president’s ability to invoke the Insurrection Act, from 1827 to recent decisions arising from the Trump administration’s efforts to deploy the National Guard to Los Angeles and Chicago.
On Lawfare Daily, Eric Columbus sat down with Anna Bower and Parloff to discuss litigation over President Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center, a judge denying a temporary restraining order in the lawsuit challenging the White House UFC fight, the status of the “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” and more.
Michael R. Dreeben, Jacqueline Sanchez, and Owen O’Brien-Powers discussed the “retrieval problem”—the question of whether Congress can reclaim authorities it ceded to the executive branch—and its implications for the judiciary’s ability to reign in executive power. They drew on historical examples to show Congress may be able to do more than some legal experts, and at least one Supreme Court justice, think.
On Lawfare Daily, Michael Feinberg sat down with Devlin Barrett, a journalist at the New York Times and author of the new book, “The Department of Revenge: How Trump Took Control of American Justice,” to talk about the seismic changes in personnel and policy that have shaken the Justice Department over the past 18 months.
Philip W. Rohlfing analyzed a gap in statutory authorization that allows National Guard personnel to protect military installations in the U.S. from unmanned aircraft incursions when federalized under Title 10, but not when acting under state control and Title 32. Rohlfing examined the gap’s consequences and proposed potential solutions.
Rozenshtein considered the legal merits and implications of the the Trump administration’s export control order for Anthropic to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5—its most advanced artificial intelligence (AI) models—for all foreign nationals, including those residing within the U.S. or working for Anthropic.
Melissa Graves analyzed the risks of incorporating AI models into intelligence agency workflows. AI models, she argued, could pose risks similar to compromised human operators and should be addressed with similar counterintelligence principles.
On Scaling Laws, Shane Tews, host of the Explain to Shane podcast and a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, joined Kevin Frazier for a cross-post conversation about the AI and cyber executive order, workforce disruption, and the future of education. They also share their respective research agendas for the summer.
Liz Maida discussed the massive amounts of data produced by biomanufacturing, arguing that the state of fragmented data across different companies prevents it from accessing valuable insights for U.S. national security.
