In his response to my earlier post on the New York Times's 19-to-0 figure--which turns out, he says, to be his 19-to-0 figure--David Remes makes several interesting points worthy of comment. I wish to fo...

Habeas lawyer David Remes writes in to defend the New York Times's use of 19-to-0 as the government's win-loss record before the D.C. Circuit in habeas cases. He makes, to be honest, a better case than I...

Just in time for the weekend, here's the latest in Mingazov. As I noted yesterday, Ravil Mingazov posted his response in opposition to the government's motion to remand his case back to the District Cour...

I missed this super-interesting speech by CIA Director David Petraeus on the relationship between technological change and the transformation, along many dimensions, of intelligence.   (The speech was de...

Congratulations to Scott L. Silliman and William B. Pollard III, both of whom the Senate last night confirmed to be judges of the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review.  Both men must formally be swor...

I have an essay on this topic in The New Republic.   It begins: When Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg rose to speak to the American Constitution Society on June 15, many in the audience hoped sh...

There has been some movement in the long-stalled Mingazov case—one of the Guantanamo habeas cases that’s still kicking around. Way back in December 2010, Larkin shared the government's brief in its appea...

Jack and Ben earlier noted the government's long-awaited brief in support of its motion for summary judgment in New York Times Co. v. Department of Justice and ACLU v.

Like Jack, I am a little surprised by the government's brief--filed late last night--in the ACLU/New York Times FOIA case on targeted killings.

Breaking: earlier today, the Senate Armed Services Committee approved its two pending nominees for judgeships on the Court of Military Commission Review - William Pollard, and Professor Scott L. Silliman...

This is a rather interesting 20 minutes of radio.