The Week That Was

Anna Bower and Roger Parloff covered the preliminary injunction hearing in L.G.M.L. v. Noem, a suit seeking to prevent the removal of hundreds of unaccompanied migrant children to Guatemala. 

Bower also described how district court judges are learning from one another’s struggles with the Trump administration, highlighting Judge Sparkle Sooknanan’s efforts to ensure the plaintiffs in her case–unaccompanied children from Guatemala–were not removed without her knowledge or over her objections.

Alexis Loeb detailed the Trump Justice Department’s use of 18 U.S.C. § 231—the civil disorder statute—against immigration rights protesters in Los Angeles. Loeb contrasted this invocation with President Trump’s prior criticism of how the Biden Justice Department used the statute in Jan. 6 prosecutions.

Gigi Liman explained how the Trump administration’s reimplementation of the 287(g) Task Force Model program—which authorizes local law enforcement officers to act as federal immigration agents—opens up new legal pathways to hold officers who violate the law to account.

Aaron S.J. Zelinsky and David Reisler detailed the unprecedented way grand juries are blocking the Justice Department’s efforts at criminal prosecutions by rejecting “overcharged” felony indictments.

On Lawfare Daily, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Parloff, Scott R. Anderson, Katherine Yon Ebright, and Loren Voss to discuss the ongoing activation of the National Guard in the District of Columbia, the Trump administration's lethal strike in the Caribbean, Harvard University's win over its funding fight in federal court, and more.

Graham Parsons—in response to Kori Schake and Jason Smith’s criticisms of his May 9 Lawfare piece—argued that military political neutrality could obligate service members to disobey a legally issued order from civilian authority.

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s murder, Wittes broke down how chaotic leadership, a preoccupation with social media, deprioritized domestic terrorism prevention, and the large-scale reassignment of agents to immigration enforcement make the FBI less effective at investigating and preventing political violence.

Katherine Pompilio shared the heavily redacted search warrant affidavit licensing the FBI’s search of John Bolton’s home. 

On Lawfare Live, Wittes sat down with Anderson, Bower, Parloff, and Eric Columbus to discuss a federal appeals court ruling upholding the $83.3 million judgment against the president for defaming E. Jean Carroll, the Supreme Court decision to stay a lower court’s order limiting immigration enforcement in California, a preliminary injunction granted in Lisa Cook’s challenge to her removal from the Federal Reserve, and more. The recording is available on Lawfare’s YouTube channel.

On Lawfare Daily, Natalie Orpett spoke with John Ryan about why the alleged perpetrators of the September 11 attacks have yet to go to trial, the challenges of reporting from Guantanamo, the role of torture in the 9/11 case, and more.

Tyler McBrien shared the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General report on ​​its administrative investigation that followed its criminal investigation of Charles McGonigal, a former FBI senior official. 

On Rational Security, Anderson sat down with Orpett, Wittes, and Rebecca Ingber to discuss the week’s big national security news, including Russian drones that penetrated Polish airspace, Israeli missile strikes on Hamas leaders in Qatar, the implications of the Trump administration’s strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat in the Caribbean, and more.

Wittes evaluated Vice President J.D. Vance’s tweet that “the highest and best use of our military” is targeting cartel members, arguing that it paints a reductive picture of the purpose of the American military. Wittes also characterized Vance’s refusal to actually defend the legality of killing of drug traffickers—beyond that he didn’t “give a shit” if a critic called it a war crime—as a symptom of indifference to the opinions of those who don’t “instinctively” agree with him.

Wittes—who has long been a vocal defender of drones and targeted killings of enemy military leadership—also explained why the Trump administration’s lethal strike on a boat allegedly carrying drugs and Tren de Aragua members should have been “unthinkable” and called for a limit to the president’s power to use military force in lieu of law enforcement authorities.

Jeffrey Lovitky responded to Faisal Kutty’s argument that Israel’s June strikes on Iran were unlawful according to jus ad bellum, arguing that Israel was entitled to use force under jus in bello without demonstrating the existence of an imminent threat.

In the latest installment of Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Essay Series, Wu Riqiang illustrated China’s long arms control tradition of prioritizing capability and development over reassurance and risk reduction, and how this tradition contributes to China’s reluctance to embrace various arms control measures.

On Lawfare Daily, Renée DiResta sat down with Joan Barata, Laís Martins, and James Görgen to discuss the trial of Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro, legal clashes over social media regulation and platform liability, the influence of Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, the broader intersection of tech and geopolitics in Brazil, and more. 

On another episode of Lawfare Daily, Anderson and Brandon Van Grack sat down with Adam Chan to discuss the history of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) role in national security, how the agency’s priorities have shifted in an era of great power competition, sourcing and supply chains for FCC-regulated technologies, and more. 

Stewart Baker argued that President Donald Trump should invoke the Defense Protection Act to prevent copyright lawsuits against artificial intelligence (AI) companies, explaining that costly lawsuits force AI companies to allocate financial resources to settlements rather than AI development and thus pose threats to AI innovation and national security.

Daniel Schwarcz and Josephine Wolff argued that the failure of cyber insurers to incentivize best practices in cybersecurity should dissuade policymakers from leaning on liability as a tool for regulating AI, and push them towards developing ex ante regulations to promote AI safety.

On Scaling Laws, Steven Adler and Kevin Frazier discussed the state of AI model testing, the meaning of AI safety, pathways to sound regulation, and more.

Carolin Kemper analyzed the security risks of “vibe coding,” where users without programming experience prompt large language models (LLMs) to write code for them. Kemper argued that vibe code’s susceptibility to dangers such as code bloat and hallucinations—coupled with the weakness of AI-automated security tools—creates cybersecurity vulnerabilities that heighten the need for rigorous manual review. 

In the latest edition of the Seriously Risky Business cybersecurity newsletter, Tom Uren described the Salesloft Drift breach and the rise of “authorization sprawl” attacks, Apple’s recent Memory Integrity Enforcement upgrade, federal efforts to curb scams and ransomware, a post-data breach pay cut for executives at the Australian airline Qantas, and more.

And on Scaling Laws, Joshua Gans joined Kevin Frazier to discuss AI-induced job displacement, possible AI regulations, how AI tools are changing higher education, and more.

And that was the week that was.