Latest in Terrorism & Extremism
Published by The Lawfare Institute in Cooperation With 
-
Statements by Prosecution and Defense on This Week's 9/11 Case Hearing
The Chief Prosecutor issued this earlier this morning. Hello to all of you. Due to the Judge’s decision to take up the joint defense motion requesting he inquire into possible defense conflicts of inter... -
4/17 Session #1: A Special Trial Counsel, and a Pause
We’re back in session. The military judge, Army Col. James L. Pohl, calls proceedings to order. Of the five 9/11 accused, there are two absentees: Walid Bin Attash and Mustafa Al-Hawsawi. That prompts... -
4/15 Motions Session #3: What Sorts of Evidence, Part Two (And a Recess)
Break being over, Cheryl Bormann picks up her thread: the conflict between absurdly strict secrecy controls and her own obligations to her client. Bin Attash is angry these days, she says, because he mus... -
4/15 Motions Session #2: What Sorts of Evidence, Part One
Our recess concludes; the action resumes. KSM lawyer David Nevin begins the defense’s remarks on possible evidence it might offer to support of AE292---a motion alleging inappropriate FBI contacts with a... -
4/15 Motions Session #1: Housekeeping, and FBI Things
It’s Tuesday, 9:12 a.m., when our Fort Meade screen comes to life: down at Guantanamo, the military judge, Army Col. James L. Pohl, calls proceedings to order. -
9/11 Case Motions Hearing: April 15 Session
Tax day is upon us; so is day two in a four-day, pre-trial motions hearing in United States v. Mohammed et al. -
4/14 Motions Hearing #1: Ex Parte Hearings, FBI Investigations, and a Recess
It’s game time, y’all. The military judge, Army Col. James Pohl, ascends the bench and resumes pretrial proceedings in the 9/11 case. All five accused are present, along with their lawyers and a few oth... -
Statement of the Chief Prosecutor on This Week's Hearing in the 9/11 Case
You'll find it here. And that's as good a reminder as any that, tomorrow, Lawfare will resume coverage of pretrial motions hearings in United States v. Mohammed et. al. This week's four-day session wil... -
On the Connections Between the AUMF and Section 702
I was asked to give testimony today before a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on two topics that may seem largely unconnected: the vitality and adequacy of the AUMF for the conflict the United States i... -
Lawfare on the Hill
Two hearings this week to take note of: Tomorrow, Tuesday April 8th at 2pm: The House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade will hold a hearing on "Is al-Qaeda Winning? -
D.C. Circuit Affirms Denial of Preliminary Injunction in Abdullah v. Obama
The D.C. Circuit has just handed down a 12-page decision in Abdullah v. Obama, affirming the district court's denial of Abdullah's motion to enjoin the U.S. government from detaining him. Hani Saleh Rash... -
Toward a Coherent Theory of the “Military Exception” to Article III
My very first Lawfare post, back in December 2011, focused on the messy constitutional question raised by United States v. Ali—a case then pending before the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces that ra...
Topics
