The Week That Was: All of Lawfare in One Post

Benjamin Wittes reminded readers that Friday marked the last day of our birthday fundraising drive and requested that everyone chip up to ensure we can continue providing and improving our coverage.

Herb Lin conceived of a nightmare scenario in which entire voter registration databases are hacked and distorted by foreign adversaries. He also asked readers to envision scenarios in which the United States would benefit from deploying “loud” cyber weapons.

Paul Rosenzweig dismissed alarmists’ concerns that the Department of Homeland Security would exploit our new concerns about cybersecurity to assume control of our heretofore decentralized electoral system. But he also predicted the government would struggle to nudge consumers into giving sufficient weight to privacy and cybersecurity concerns when deciding what kind of phone or other digital device they will purchase. Lastly, he shone a spotlight on a peculiar case in which a hedge fund shorted a medical device company because it bought knowledge of a cyber vulnerability in the company’s devices.

Michael Specter opined on the Going Dark debate in the context of a recent talk given by a top Apple executive at the Blackhat conference.

Sarah Tate Chambers authored the first post in Lawfare’s new roundup of legal news about cybercrime.

Kenneth Anderson highlighted a paper by Rebecca Hamilton that proposes a way that international criminal law can address the role a state can play in enabling individuals to commit international crimes. He also flagged a new article by Adam Pearlman that explores why the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay remain such a legal and moral thorn in the United States’ side.

Quinta Jurecic relayed a statement by Mark Martins, the military commissions chief prosecutor, commemorating the impending anniversaries of the 9/11 attacks and the 2000 USS Cole attack. She also both covered the first day of Abd al Rahim al Nashiri’s military commission trial after a trifling 18-month delay and posted the latest episode of The Lawfare Podcast, wherein Michel Paradis and Bob Loeb discuss a recent ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that denied Nashiri’s request for the federal courts to take up his case:

Yishai Schwartz updated us on another court case that limited the ability of terrorist victims to seek redress through the judicial system.

C. Christine Fair, Ali Hamza, and Rebecca Heller highlighted some poll numbers reveal how huge swathes of Bangladesh’s public support a variety of highly illiberal views, including the morality of suicide terrorism.

Shannon Togawa Mercer peered through the opaque cloud swirling over Britain’s relationship with the European Union to guide us through what will likely happen once Prime Minister Theresa May invoked Article 50.

Chris Mirasola brought back "Water Wars" in time to tell us about this year’s G20 summit in China and President Barack Obama’s familiar exhortation that Beijing should abide by existing international norms and laws.

In what is admittedly a departure from Lawfare's normal thematic fare, Ben challenged data-driven election forecasters to test their algorithms against his homespun electoral forecast model.

In addition, he uploaded NBC’s “Commander in Chief Forum” event where Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton answered national security questions by veterans.

He also, along with Jack Goldsmith, invited readers to attend an event in which he will interview Rosa Brooks on the question of civil-military relations among other subjects for Lawfare’s ongoing series of book soirees with the Hoover Institution.

And just this morning, he brought us this week's episode of Rational Security, complete with actual fireballs:

Stewart Baker, meanwhile, brought us a new episode of the Steptoe Cyberlaw podcast after its Nashiri-like summer slumber:

And that was the week that was.