Share

cover art for Rational Security: The "Law and Order: Executive Victims Unit" Edition

The Lawfare Podcast: Patreon Edition

Rational Security: The "Law and Order: Executive Victims Unit" Edition

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Molly Reynolds, and Anna Bower to talk through another big week of national security news, including:

  • “Checked Out and Off Balance.” Over its first two weeks in office, the Trump administration has pushed against the traditional limits of congressional authority by unlawfully impounding funds, terminating federal employees contrary to statute, and seeking to dismantle at least one federal agency contrary to statute. But the Republican-controlled Congress has thus far remained almost entirely complacent, if not supportive of the president’s actions. How far will the Trump administration be able to go? And what will the long-term consequences be for the separation of powers?
  • “Jus Soli? Jus Kidding.’” As one of his first acts after returning to the White House, Donald Trump issued an executive order refusing to recognize birthright citizenship in the United States for anyone whose parents are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. All told, it seems like a clear effort to trigger a review of the traditional understanding of the 14th Amendment as implementing jus soli, meaning citizenship based on place of birth. But how likely is it to work?
  • “Fo’ Drizz(coll).” The Trump administration’s promised campaign of retribution has hit the Justice Department, where senior supervisors have been reassigned and prosecutors involved in the Jan. 6 investigations have been terminated, perhaps unlawfully. But now efforts to gather the names of FBI agents involved in those same investigations for presumed retribution are facing serious pushback, including from the Bureau’s Acting Director Brian Driscoll (known as “the Drizz”). How hard can the FBI and Justice Department push back? And where are the legal limits on what the Trump administration can do?

In object lessons, Molly chose not to gamble and stayed on-brand with her recommendation of local-NPR-affiliate podcast Scratch & Win. Ben asked himself the question that many at the FBI are asking themselves these days: “WWDD?” Scott followed the sentiment with an endorsement of “Civil servants shouldn’t quit their jobs,” by Matthew Yglesias. And Anna insisted that her reverence of the TV show Severance has absolutely nothing—really, nothing—to do with belly buttons.

We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!

Use promo code RATIONALSECURITY at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan:

https://incogni.com/rationalsecurity

More episodes

View all episodes

  • Lawfare Daily: The Trials of the Trump Administration, April 3

    01:38:08|
    In a live conversation on YouTube, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Molly Roberts, Anna Bower, and Roger Parloff and Lawfare Associate Editor Katherine Pompilio to discuss Lawfare’s new database which is tracking the non-compliance with court orders by the government, Pam Bondi being fired as attorney general, legal challenges to President Trump’s new elections integrity executive order, and more.You can find information on legal challenges to Trump administration actions here. And check out Lawfare’s new homepage on the litigation, new Bluesky account, and new WITOAD merch.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.
  • Lawfare Archive: A World Without Caesars

    52:56|
    From March 14, 2025: This episode of the Lawfare Podcast features Glen Weyl, economist and author at Microsoft Research; Jacob Mchangama, Executive Director of the Future of Free Speech Project at Vanderbilt; and Ravi Iyer, Managing Director of the USC Marshall School Neely Center. Together with Renee DiResta, Associate Research Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown and Contributing Editor at Lawfare, they talk about design vs moderation. Conversations about the challenges of social media often focus on moderation—what stays up and what comes down. Yet the way a social media platform is built influences everything from what we see, to what is amplified, to what content is created in the first place—as users respond to incentives, nudges, and affordances. Design processes are often invisible or opaque, and users have little power—though new decentralized platforms are changing that. So they talk about designing a prosocial media for the future, and the potential for an online world without Caesars.
  • Lawfare Archive: How to Steal a Presidential Election

    57:22|
    From March 4, 2024: As the 2024 presidential election approaches, a vital question is whether the legal architecture governing the election is well crafted to prevent corruption and abuse. In their new book, “How to Steal a Presidential Election,” Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman argue that despite the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022, serious abuse of the presidential election rules remains a live possibility. Jack Goldsmith sat down with Lessig to learn why. They discussed the continuing possibility of vice presidential mischief, the complex role of faithless electors, strategic behavior related to recounts, and the threat of rogue governors. They also pondered whether any system of rules can regulate elections in the face of widespread bad faith by the actors involved.
  • Lawfare Daily: The Privacy Law That's Supposed To Be Protecting Us Online Turns 40

    38:12|
    The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which is designed to protect users' privacy—including privacy online—turned 40 this year. On March 6, Lawfare hosted an event at Georgetown Law marking the event and featuring panel discussions with the authors of our paper series, Installing Updates to ECPA, in which experts from various disciplines reflected on the law, what’s changed over the last 40 years, and how ECPA should be updated to meet today’s realities. On today's podcast, we're sharing the opening remarks from that event, featuring legendary Supreme Court advocate Michael Dreeban, who argued many of the landmark ECPA cases. He talked about where ECPA came from and how it evolved, how it relates to the 4th Amendment, and where the law stands now. You can watch the entire event and read the paper series on our website here. 
  • Rational Security: The "Chicken Sh*t Bingo" Edition

    01:08:29|
    This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Senior Editors Anna Bower, Kevin Frazier, and Kate Klonick to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:“The X Post Facto Rule.” The Justice Department and lawyers representing Anthropic faced off last week in a Northern California courtroom over whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s X post and som related communications amounted to an official order and if the Pentagon’s supply chain risk designation retaliated against the company’s First Amendment-protected views, among other issues. On March 26, Judge Rita Lin, in that case, stayed the supply chain risk designation, ruling that the Pentagon had, in fact, retaliated unlawfully against Anthropic. We’re also waiting for another related decision from a D.C. Circuit panel, expected to come down any time now. What should we make of Judge Lin’s ruling, and do we expect the D.C. Circuit to follow suit? And what does it all mean for AI companies and their relationship with the government?“Strait Outta Options.” Oil, gas, helium, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizer—the ongoing conflict with Iran has upended global supply chains, with the Strait of Hormuz remaining closed as critical infrastructure in neighboring Gulf states faces Iranian attacks. The U.S. has started to feel the first of its effects through rising costs and a trepidatious stock market, reminiscent of the supply chain shortages felt during the coronavirus pandemic. It's unclear how severe and how long they will last, but what could be some of the national security and political implications if the supply chain shocks continue? And what does it mean for the trajectory of the Iran conflict?“Space: The Financial Frontier.” NASA astronauts launched this week on the Artemis II mission, the first crewed mission to orbit the moon in more than half a century. It’s the biggest step to date in the new emerging space race, most specifically with China—one driven predominantly by private actors, the biggest of whom, SpaceX, is preparing to make an unprecedentedly large initial public offering in coming weeks. How should we feel about this new, very different space race compared to past ones? And what might it mean, both for good and ill? In object lessons, Kate looks forward to filling the pages of her new notebook and ponders if she has so much to say that she’ll need another one. Anna wants immunity from ridicule for her love of Survivor. Scott is impatiently waiting for his chance to binge all of the new season of For All Mankind. And Kevin applauds boring AI—that is, using new technology to ease enduring human challenges. 
  • Lawfare Daily: Beyond the Headlines: A History of U.S.-Iran Relations

    01:02:42|
    In this episode, Ariane Tabatabai sits down with historian, John Ghazvinian, the author of, “America and Iran: A History, 1720 to the Present,” to discuss U.S.-Iran relations. They take a step back from the current conflict to talk about the key events that have shaped the relationship between the two countries and their perceptions of one another. 
  • Lawfare Daily: Joel Braunold on West Bank Violence and Israel’s New Lebanon Offensive

    49:30|
    For today’s episode, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sits down with Joel Braunold, the Managing Director of the Center Project, for the latest in their regular series on recent developments in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.Together, they dig deep into the spike in violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, Israel’s new military offensive in southern Lebanon, how they both relate to the ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Iran, and what Israel’s expanding range of hostilities may mean for the Israeli parliamentary elections scheduled for later this year.
  • Lawfare Daily: What’s Influencing Politics Online? X’s Algorithm, Creators, and the New Persuasion Machine

    47:56|
    In this episode, Lawfare Contributing Editor Renée DiResta speaks with Nathaniel Lubin, co-author of “How Social Media Creators Shape Mass Politics,” and Philine Widmer, co-author of a recent Nature paper, “The Political Effects of X’s Feed Algorithm.” Together, they discuss two different layers of online influence—a platform’s algorithms and the trusted voices inside it—and their implications for mass politics.The conversation explores what happens when recommendation systems shape what people see, and what happens when creators shape how people interpret it. They discuss whether algorithms move political attitudes by shifting exposure and salience, whether creators are persuasive because audiences trust them, and what these findings suggest about political influence in an environment increasingly organized by feeds, rankings, and parasocial relationships.Additional reading: “Twitter Is Not Real Life,” by Lakshya Jain in The Argument, February 5, 2026“X Really Is Pulling Users to the Right,” by John Herrman in Intelligencer, February 21, 2026
  • March Minipod: Is There International Legal Liability for the Boat Strikes or Iran Strikes?

    20:07|
    On this month’s minipod, Lawfare Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey talked to Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett about whether there was any potential legal exposure for President Trump or his administration for either the strikes on boats in the Eastern Pacific and Caribbean Sea or for the U.S. strikes on Iran.