The Week That Was

Quinta Jurecic, Natalie Orpett, and Benjamin Wittes discussed the Supreme Court’s Monday decision that individuals detained under the Alien Enemies Act must challenge their detentions by seeking a writ of habeas corpus. They also considered unresolved questions, including what constitutes reasonable notice to detainees, the remedy available to the 260 Venezuelans already deported to El Salvador, whether Judge James Boasberg will find the government in contempt, and more.

Alan Rozenshtein examined the erosion of the presumption of regularity—a deference doctrine whereby courts presume that government officials act lawfully—in instances where the government has appeared to act in bad faith. Rozenshtein warned of the profound consequences the loss of this doctrine will have, such as the deterioration of institutional integrity within the Department of Justice and increased attacks on the courts’ authority and legitimacy.

Molly E. Reynolds and Scott R. Anderson broke down the expedited procedures in the National Emergencies Act by which Congress can rescind tariffs President Donald Trump imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Reynolds and Anderson highlighted several challenges Congress would encounter, including a likely presidential veto, discord within the House Republican caucus, and more.

In a live conversation on April 11 at 4 p.m. ET, Wittes spoke to Bob Bauer, Anna Bower, Jurecic, Roger Parloff, and Pearce about the status of the civil litigation against Trump’s executive actions, including the Supreme Court’s rulings in the Alien Enemies Act case and in the firing of probationary employees case.

On Lawfare Daily, Anderson sat down with Peter Harrell and Jennifer Hillman to talk about the new global tariffs that Trump imposed last week, whether his use of IEEPA to impose them will survive judicial scrutiny, and more.

On Rational Security, Anderson sat down with Jurecic, James Pearce, and Wittes to talk through the week's biggest national security news stories, including the Supreme Court’s ruling that detainees under the Alien Enemies Act must challenge via habeas; the Court’s impending review of Humphrey’s Executor and other case law preserving independent agencies; firings in the Justice Department; and more.

Jeffrey Vagle examined the origins and development of the state secrets privilege through significant Supreme Court rulings including United States v. Reynolds and Totten v. United States. Vagle argued that courts must more critically assess government assertions of the privilege and be careful not to conflate the privilege with the bar for litigation set out in Totten.

Dan Maurer explained why Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's intended reform of the Judge Advocate General's (JAG) corps threatens to undermine the critical role JAGs play in ensuring adherence to the law of armed conflict principles and formulating the rules of engagement (ROE). Maurer suggested that Congress protect JAGs’ independence by mandating a JAG’s inclusion in a unit commander’s special staff and requiring regular updates to the standing ROE.

On Lawfare Daily, in a recording of a live conversation on April 4, Anderson spoke to Bower, Parloff, Pearce, and Steve Vladeck about the status of the civil litigation against Trump’s executive actions, including how the Supreme Court is handling the cases, deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, and more.

Bower shared a letter from the District of Columbia Office of Disciplinary Counsel declining to launch a probe of the interim U.S. attorney Ed Martin over an alleged ethics violation he committed when he sought to dismiss the criminal charges of a man whom he represented as a defense attorney.

Bower also shared emails that show a now-rescinded directive from the Department of Energy instructing employees to gather information on business dealings between government contractors and law firms the president targeted in executive orders.

Wittes highlighted why the Supreme Court’s response to the government's claim that the district court cannot order Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia’s return from El Salvador—despite their acknowledgment that his deportation was in error—is an important test of whether the courts can enforce the law in the face of the administration’s judicial defiance.

Wittes argued that—because of the government’s disdain for court orders and repeated failures to comply—judges can longer afford the administration the presumption of good faith and regularity.

Jordan S. Allen, Neil Noronha, and Tanner Wilburn discussed the ongoing legal challenges to the Trump administration’s personnel actions, such as firing career civil servants and possibly violating the Appointments Clause. They also explored how recent Supreme Court rulings have chipped away at removal protections for agency heads, thus expanding executive control over personnel and nominally independent agencies.

Kevin Frazier broke down new Office of Management and Budget policies that prioritize rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) and minimal “bureaucratic restrictions.” Frazier emphasized that the success of policies depends on the government’s ability to maintain public trust, balance innovation with safeguards, and involve a diverse set of vendors.

Frazier argued that the pursuit of AI sovereignty—in which states seek domestic control over essential AI inputs and infrastructure—comes at the expense of global collaboration and collective progress. Frazier further discussed the risks associated with the securitization and centralization of AI and proposed mechanisms to democratize AI access, including public interest endowments and tiered access agreements.

In the latest edition of the Seriously Risky Business cybersecurity newsletter, Tom Uren discussed the head of the National Security Agency (NSA) and the United States Cyber Command, the effect that the European Union’s growing skepticism that the U.S. will uphold data flow agreements will have on U.S. tech companies, a Chinese information operation targeting Canada’s upcoming federal election, and more.

David Kirichenko discussed the integration of AI into military operations, particularly in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Kirichenko emphasized that although AI has the potential to enhance precision and reduce civilian casualties, it also poses significant risks, including the possibility of an escalated arms race, an over-reliance on technology, and more.

Jason Healey, Carina Kaplan, and Christine McNeill described the challenges the government faces in regulatory cybersecurity amid four key market failures—information asymmetries, negative externalities, market power, and public goods. Healey, Kaplan, and McNeill offered recommendations for refining understanding of the market and developing a coordinated strategy for cyber regulation.

On Lawfare Daily, Tara Varma joined Orpett to discuss the latest in French politics, including far-right leader Marine Le Pen’s embezzlement conviction and subsequent ban from politics, President Emmanuel Macron’s leadership amidst the upheaval in the transatlantic relationship, the push to build European defense capacity, and more.

On Lawfare Daily, Tom Karako joined Daniel Byman to discuss the Trump administration's missile defense proposals known as “Golden Dome,” its feasibility and cost, how China and Russia might respond, and what realistic success would look like.

In the latest installment of Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Essay series, Candace Rondeaux explained the significance of a Krakow court’s conviction of two Wagner Group operatives on charges of espionage and terrorism-related activities, including spreading pro-Kremlin propaganda. Rondeaux emphasized how the case highlights an emerging legal framework for combating Russian influence operations and other forms of hybrid warfare.

On Escalation, Escalation’s reporting and production team—Wittes, Anastasiia Lapatina, Max Johnston, and Tyler McBrien—shared a behind-the-scenes look at the making of the show in this bonus episode.

On Lawfare Daily, Anna Hickey sat down with Erin Sikorsky to talk about the omission of climate change from the Annual Threat Assessment, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s testimony in front of Congress, and the national security risks of climate change.

And Maj. Kevin Coble reviewed Erica Gaston’s “Illusions of Control: Dilemmas in Managing U.S. Proxy Forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria,” highlighting her analysis of control mechanisms using principal-agent theory and the bureaucratic politics approach, as well as the implications her research has for national security decision making.

And that was the week that was.