National Security Law Commons^™

Foreword, Deborah W. Denno, Erica Valencia-Graham

Fordham Law Review

This Foreword overviews an unprecedented Symposium on these wide ranging topics titled The New AI: The Legal and Ethical Implications of ChatGPT and Other Emerging Technologies. Hosted by the Fordham Law Review and cosponsored by Fordham University School of Law’s Neuroscience and Law Center on November 3, 2023, the Symposium brought together attorneys, judges, professors, and scientists to explore the opportunities and risks presented by AI, especially GenAI like ChatGPT. The discussion raised complex questions concerning AI sentience and personal privacy, as well as the future of legal ethics, education, and employment. Although the AI industry uniformly predicts ever more …

National Security And Federalizing Data Privacy Infrastructure For Ai Governance, Margaret Hu, Eliott Behar, Davi Ottenheimer

Fordham Law Review

This Essay contends that data infrastructure, when implemented on a national scale, can transform the way we conceptualize artificial intelligence (AI) governance. AI governance is often viewed as necessary for a wide range of strategic goals, including national security. It is widely understood that allowing AI and generative AI to remain self-regulated by the U.S. AI industry poses significant national security risks. Data infrastructure and AI oversight can assist in multiple goals, including: maintaining data privacy and data integrity; increasing cybersecurity; and guarding against information warfare threats. This Essay concludes that conceptualizing data infrastructure as a form of critical infrastructure …

Murky Materiality & Scattered Standards: In Favor Of A More Uniform System Of Sst Disclosure Requirements, Megan Ganley

Fordham Law Review

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires corporations to disclose their business in or with state sponsors of terrorism (SSTs). The SEC solicits these disclosures with varying standards arising under several different mechanisms. These mechanisms include the requirements of the materiality standard, the provisions of Regulation S-K, targeted inquiry in individually issued comment letters, and affirmative requirements mandated under specific legislation. Each of these mechanisms requires disclosure of slightly different information regarding SSTs with varying degrees of exactitude. This Note examines the SEC’s current SST disclosure framework, considering the benefits, as well as the criticisms, of these disclosure mandates. This …

Cfius In The Age Of Chinese Investment, Patrick Griffin

Fordham Law Review

As China’s economy has developed, its companies, both state-owned and privately held, have moved to expand their operations in the United States to the point where many now seek to invest in—and on occasion, acquire—U.S. counterparts. This trend has set off alarm bells over fears that China’s unique political and economic system, which gives the state extensive influence over all corporations regardless of their ownership structure, renders such transactions national security threats. Recent hostility toward Chinese-led inbound investment is not a new trend; Congress has attempted to assert itself into the screening process undertaken by the Committee on Foreign Investment …

Threats Against America: The Second Circuit As Arbiter Of National Security Law, David Raskin

Fordham Law Review

For nearly 100 years, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has been a leading force in defining and resolving the uniquely thorny issues that arise at the intersection of individual liberty and national security. The court’s decisions in this arena are characterized by its willingness to tackle difficult questions and its skill in balancing the needs of the government with the rights of the accused to ensure fundamental fairness in the ages of espionage and terror.

Bank Liability Under The Antiterrorism Act: The Mental State Requirement Under § 2333(A), Olivia G. Chalos

Fordham Law Review

This Note specifically addresses the jurisdictional split on the mental state requirement necessary to hold a defendant liable under the ATA. This Note explores the current judicial interpretations of the statute and concludes that, as the statute stands, the Second Circuit best interprets the mental state requirement for § 2333(a) claims predicated on a violation of material support laws. This Note proposes, however, that Congress should amend the ATA to clarify the state-of-mind requirement and should only allow for a cause of action where a bank manifests heightened culpability through intentional wrongdoing in the provision of financial services to foreign …

Show Me The Warrant: Protection Of Stored Electronic Communications In New York State, Kaitlin G. Klamann

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Securing The Smart Grid: Protecting National Security And Privacy Through Mandatory, Enforcable Interoperability Standards, Christopher Bosch

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Detect, Disrupt, And Detain: Local Law Enforcement's Critical Roles In Combating Homegrown Extremism And The Evolving Terrorist Threat, Mitch Silber, Adam Frey

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Spatial Terrorism, Dawinder S. Sidhu

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Terrorism, under federal law, generally means an act of politically- or socially-motivated violence perpetrated against innocents. Terrorism within the meaning of federal law, in other words, exists only if a cognizable motive is uncovered. This definition also sees the United States as an undifferentiated landscape—by its own terms, it fails to take into account any geographic nuance in acts of mass violence. This Article suggests that spatial considerations are relevant in determining whether an act of mass violence constitutes an act of terrorism for purposes of federal law. It points to cities—which are characterized by a highly concentrated, fluid population, …

Strange Bedfellows: How Expanding The Public Safety Exception To Miranda Benefits Counterterrorism Suspects, Geoffrey Corn, Chris Jenks

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Fair Trade: The President’S Power To Recover Captured U.S. Servicemembers And The Recent Prisoner Exchange With The Taliban, Celidon Pitt

Fordham Law Review

The Obama Administration’s controversial exchange of five Taliban detainees for a captured U.S. soldier in May 2014 reignited a heated debate over the proper scope of wartime executive authority. From a legal perspective, the primary issue centers on the constitutional balance of power between congressional appropriations and the President’s power as Commander in Chief. A complete analysis incorporates both judicial and historical precedent to evaluate the conflict within the broader context of prisoner recovery efforts.

This Note argues that, regardless of the validity of legislative restrictions on the transfer of Guantánamo detainees, the President possessed sufficient authority to conduct the …

The Rise Of The Security State, Wang Yuhua, Carl F. Minzner

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past two decades, the Chinese domestic security apparatus has expanded dramatically. “Stability maintenance” operations have become a priority for local Chinese authorities. We argue that the birth of these trends dates to the early 1990s, when central Party authorities adopted new governance models that differed dramatically from those that of the 1980s. They increased the bureaucratic rank of public security chiefs within the Party apparatus, expanded the reach of the Party political-legal apparatus into a broader range of governance issues, and altered cadre evaluation standards to increase the sensitivity of local authorities to social protest. We show that …

Due Process And The Non-Citizen: A Revolution Reconsidered, Joseph Landau

Faculty Scholarship

Mathews v. Eldridge is typically understood to be a ruling limiting due process protections in benefits determinations, but this case of judicial restraint in ordinary domestic law has activist features where non-citizens are concerned. The transplantation of Mathews into the critical areas of immigration and national security has produced a body of law that is slowly ushering in rights-affirming outcomes and weakening conventional doctrines of exceptionalism in immigration and national security. There are two chief reasons for this. First, ever since Mathews required an explicit judicial determination of private interests, courts have used an increasingly particularistic, case-by-case analysis in immigration …

Disappearing Legal Black Holes And Converging Domains: Changing Individual Rights Protection In National Security And Foreign Affairs, Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay attempts to describe what is distinctive about the way the protection of individual rights in the areas of national security and foreign affairs has been occurring in recent decades. Historically, the right to protection under the U.S. Constitution and courts has been sharply limited by categorical distinctions based on geography, war, and, to some extent, citizenship. These categorical rules carved out domains where the courts and Constitution provided protections and those where they did not. The institutional design and operating rules of the national security state tracked these formal, categorical rules about the boundaries of protection. There have …

Are Damages Different? Bivens And National Security, Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

Litigation challenging the national security actions of the federal government has taken a seemingly paradoxical form in recent years. Prospective coercive remedies like injunctions and habeas corpus (a kind of injunction) are traditionally understood to involve much greater intrusions by the judiciary into government functioning than retrospective money damages awards. Yet federal courts have developed and strictly applied doctrines barring Bivens damages actions against federal officials because of an asserted need to preserve the prerogatives of the political branches in national security and foreign affairs. At the same time, the courts have been increasingly assertive in cases involving coercive remedies, …

Judicial Review For Enemy Fighters: The Court’S Fateful Turn In Ex Parte Quirin, The Nazi Saboteur Case, Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

The emerging conventional wisdom in the legal academy is that individual rights under the U.S. Constitution should be extended to noncitizens outside the United States. This claim - called globalism in my article - has been advanced with increasing vigor in recent years, most notably in response to legal positions taken by the Bush administration during the war on terror. Against a Global Constitution challenges the textual and historical grounds advanced to support the globalist conventional wisdom and demonstrates that they have remarkably little support. At the same time, the article adduces textual and historical evidence that noncitizens were among …

Chevron Meets Youngstown: National Security And The Administrative State, Joseph Landau

Faculty Scholarship

The past several years have witnessed a burst of scholarship at the intersection of national security and administrative law. Many supporters of this approach endorse a heightened, “super-strong” brand of Chevron deference to presidential decisionmaking during times of emergency. Believing that the Executive’s comparative advantage in expertise, access to information, and accountability warrant minimal judicial scrutiny, these Chevron-backers advance an Executive-centric view of national security powers. Other scholars, by contrast, dispute Chevron’s relevance to national security. These Chevron-detractors argue for an interventionist judiciary in national security matters. Both camps criticize the Supreme Court’s scaling of deference to the Executive after …

Understanding The Exceptional And Dynamic Nature Of Boumediene Rights To Court Access, Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

This short piece replies to Professor Steve Vladeck's comments on my essay 'Do Boumediene Rights Expire?' 161 U. Pa. L. Rev. Pennumbra 20 (2012), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2166103. In this reply, I further develop the argument that Boumediene rights to court access may have expired for those Guantanamo detainees determined through habeas litigation to be enemy fighters; and whether these judicially-confirmed enemy fighters have continuing rights court access under Boumediene goes to the federal courts' subject matter jurisdiction, meaning that the Obama administration's concession of continued court access is inoperative and federal courts must sua sponte raise and decide the issue.

Do Boumediene Rights Expire?, Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

In 2008, Guantanamo detainees won a landmark victory in Boumediene v. Bush, which held that the Congress and the President could not prevent the detainees from accessing the courts to seek release via habeas corpus. The Court decided that persons claiming to be innocent civilians deserved a day in court, even though they were noncitizens held by the U.S. military as enemy combatants on foreign territory. The Court applied a fact-specific test that granted habeas rights to noncitizens outside the United States only when a balance of factors — including citizenship, enemy status, the nature of status review procedures, the …

Judicial Power And Moral Ideology In Wartime: Shaping The Legal Process In World War I Britain , Rachel Vorspan

Faculty Scholarship

Offering a cautionary lesson of contemporary significance, the Article suggests that judicial power is not in and of itself the solution to executive infringements on due process rights in wartime. It examines the response of the British judiciary to serious threats to its institutional power during the First World War. To facilitate prosecution of the war, the government narrowed the jurisdiction of the traditional courts by eliminating jury trial, subjecting civilians to court-martial, and establishing new administrative tribunals to displace the traditional courts. Rather than remaining passive and deferential to the executive, as scholars have generally assumed, the judges moved …

Law And War: Individual Rights, Executive Authority, And Judicial Power In England During World War I , Rachel Vorspan

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the role of the English courts during World War I, particularly the judicial response to executive infringements on individual liberty. Focusing on the areas of detention, deportation, conscription, and confiscation of property, the Article revises the conventional depiction of the English judiciary during World War I as passive and peripheral. It argues that in four ways the judges were activist and energetic, both in advancing the government's war effort and in promoting their own policies and powers. First, they were judicial warriors, developing innovative legal strategies to legitimize detention and other governmental restrictions on personal. Second, they …