Every day brings a new and different story about the Obama administration’s plans with regard to a possible deal with Iran as it relates to domestic and international law.  One can understand why the adm...

I was just about to post on this presser, where State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki refused to answer whether the United States would bless any nonbinding agreement with Iran in a UN Security Council...

Last week, before a largely adoring crowd at a joint session of Congress, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unleased a fusillade against the administration’s potential Iran deal.

It is now clear that any deal with Iran will by its terms be a non-binding agreement. That means the United States will have no international law obligation to comply with the agreement.

Earlier this morning, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard testimony from Secretary of State John Kerry, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mart...

C-SPAN's Washington Journal had two lengthy segments on the AUMF controversy this morning.

Editor's note: The following is adapted from a post on Markaz, the blog of the Brookings Center for Middle East Policy. Lawfare has already seen a lot of coverage about the letter 47 Republican senators...

If, as Marty and I just argued, the deal with Iran is a non-binding agreement under international law, then, as we stated, “there is little doubt about the President’s constitutional authority to make th...

[Cross-posted at Just Security.] In Marty’s post yesterday about the letter that 47 Senators sent to “the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he briefly addressed the quest

Despite a vote to end security cooperation with Israel, PA crackdown on Hamas continues: Last week, the Central Committee of the Palestinian Liberation Organization voted to end security cooperation with...

Please like our Facebook page and follow Lawfare on Twitter: