National Security Law Commons^™

Letter From The Editor, Ryan Nelson

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Ganging Up On Terrorism: Transnational Gangs And Tier Iii Terrorist Organizations, Adam S. Domitz

American University Law Review

The Immigration and Nationality Act sets forth three distinct tiers of terrorist organizations. Unlike Tiers I and II, Tier III does not require official designation in the Federal Register by cabinet level officials. Instead, the tier calls for case-by-case adjudication by executive branch employees such as asylum officers and immigration judges. Noncitizens who engage in certain activities with or who have certain ties to any of the three tiers of organizations are inadmissible to the United States and barred from most forms of immigration relief, subject to limited exceptions. Nevertheless, in recent years, a variety of entities—including the Trump administration—have …

Widening The Lens On Content Moderation, Jenna Ruddock, Justin Sherman

Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series

No abstract provided.

Chinese Technology Platforms Operating In The United States: Assessing The Threat (Originally Published As A Joint Report Of The National Security, Technology, And Law Working Group At The Hoover Institution At Stanford University And The Tech, Law & Security Program At American University Washington College Of Law), Gary Corn, Jennifer Daskal, Jack Goldsmith, Chris Inglis, Paul Rosenzweig, Samm Sacks, Bruce Schneier, Alex Stamos, Vincent Stewart

Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series

No abstract provided.

Piercing The Veil: Reconciling Fisa And The State Secrets Privilege In The Schrems Ii Era, Chris Baumohl

American University Law Review

Twenty years after 9/11 and the beginning of the “War on Terror,” access to judicial redress arising out of national security programs remains mired in a labyrinth of procedural hurdles, including the state secrets privilege. Nearly seventy years after the Supreme Court first enunciated the modern state secrets privilege, courts still struggle to articulate a practicable standard that appropriately balances the government’s need to protect its secrets and plaintiffs’ need to vindicate their constitutional rights. This issue is particularly acute in surveillance litigation, where broad construction of the privilege precludes plaintiffs from establishing standing. However, as the Ninth Circuit found …

Letter From The Editor

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

“Hey Siri, I’M Being Pulled Over.”, Charlene Collazo Goldfield, Gabriela Chambi, Amanda Torres

Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series

Statistics show that policing disproportionately affects communities of color; police are more likely to use force against Black and brown people.¹ Data from non-violent encounters (e.g., reason for the stop, type of force used, and presence of witnesses) is rarely collected or disregarded altogether.² Video evidence can publicize police violence. Bystander video during George Floyd’s murder led to arrests and a global racial reckoning because it depicted the reality of police encounters for people of color. Although technological advancements have led to positive developments for civilian safety (e.g., body cameras and in-car videos), data collection consistency and accountability …

The Conservative Court And Torture Attenuation, Ari B. Rubin

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Responsibility As Cooperation And Control: The Case Of Intelligence Agents, Raphael Bitton

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of Domestic And Foreign Legal Mechanisms To Counter The Rise Of White Nationalism, John C. Jankosky Ii

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

The Right Of Return: The Isis Bride, Casey Hare-Osifchin

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Equal Prosecution For All: Violent Extremism At The Intersection Of Hate Crime And Terrorism, Gabrielle Leeman

American University National Security Law Brief

After a white supremacist used his vehicle as a weapon to purposefully attack anti-racism protestors in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017, federal officials called the incident domestic terrorism. The incident, in fact, met the definition of domestic terrorism. But the perpetrator was not prosecuted under any of the available terrorism statutes. The defendant was instead charged with, and later pled guilty to, committing hate crimes. It is imperative that we recognize all forms of terrorism as terrorism and use the legal system fairly to prosecute all terrorist attacks as terrorism. But the current terrorism statutory framework hinders the ability to prosecute …

The Capitol Riot, Racism And The Future Of American Democracy, Ryan T. Williams

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Private Military Contractors: The Armed Forces Absent From The War Powers Resolution, Mckinney Voss Wheeler

American University National Security Law Brief

Private military contractors (PMCs) are increasingly ubiquitous in international conflicts, providing security, transport services, and even fighting alongside commissioned troops in battle. Yet for the United States, the ambiguity surrounding PMCs’ role in war presents a serious threat to the constitutional balance of war powers. The Founding Fathers deliberately divided those powers between the executive and legislative branches, aware of the dangers of concentrating them too heavily; and Congress further clarified protocol with the War Powers Resolution in 1973. But the War Powers Resolution, which requires the President to notify Congress when engaging "U.S. Armed Forces" in battle, omits any …

The Artemis Accords: Employing Space Diplomacy To De-Escalate A National Security Threat And Promote Space Commercialization, Elya A. Taichman

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

The Case For Presumptions Of Evil: How The E.O. 13873 'Trump' Card Could Secure American Networks From Third-Party Code Threats, Caroline Elyse Burks

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

When Thoughts And Prayers Are Not Enough: Why Age-Based Restrictions On Purchasing Firearms Pass Constitutional Muster, Madeline P. Fuller

American University Law Review

After the tragic shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that took the lives of seventeen students and staff members and injured countless others, the community debated how this event could have been prevented. There were security failures on the part of the school and police—unlocked doors, passive deputies and a security guard, and a broken PA system—all of which may have lessened the casualties had they been operating properly. However, these security measures might not have been tested and found lacking if another preventative measure had already taken place: prohibiting the young shooter from legally purchasing a weapon.

Florida …

National Security Decision-Making In The Age Of Technology: Delivering Outcomes On Time And On Target, Gary Corn

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Covert Deception, Strategic Fraud, And The Rule Of Prohibited Intervention (Originally Published As Part Of The Hoover Institution’S Aegis Series), Gary Corn

Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series

No abstract provided.

Of Monopolies And Monocultures: The Intersection Of Patents And National Security, Charles Duan

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

It was certainly an odd thing for the Department of Justice attorney arguing for the United States to appear before the Ninth Circuit to tell the appellate judges that a federal agency was wrong. This was what happened in a Federal Trade Commission enforcement action against Qualcomm Inc., a semiconductor technology company. As a substantial holder of patents on mobile communications technologies and also a leading manufacturer of chips used in that same industry, the FTC charged Qualcomm with anticompetitive conduct; the district court agreed and enjoined Qualcomm from certain patent licensing practices. It was that award of injunctive relief …

Solving The Emerging Technology And National Security Conundrum, Shabbir Hamid

Upper Level Writing Requirement Research Papers

No abstract provided.

Transnational Government Hacking, Jennifer C. Daskal

Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series

No abstract provided.

Treason In The Age Of Terrorism: Do Americans Who Join Isis 'Levy War' Against The United States?, Stephen Jackson

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Legalizing Intelligence Sharing: A Consensus Approach, Brian Mund

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Congress-In-Chief: Congressional Options To Compel Presidential War-Making, Clark H. Campbell

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Armored Plating And Aluminum Foil Are Not Like Products: Consequences Of The United States' Overbroad Interpretation Of Article Xxi Of The Gatt, Anthony Nardi

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Cybersecurity Regulation For The Smart Grid Could Upset The Current Balance Of Federal And State Jurisdiction In Electricity Regulation, Cynthia Anderson

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

The Posse Comitatus Act And The Fourth Amendment's Exclusionary Rule, Patrick Walsh, Paul Sullivan

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Preparing To Commit Domestic Terrorist Activity: Does The United States Have Adequate Tools To Stop This?, Diane Webber

American University International Law Review

No abstract provided.

Concluding Observations On Sovereignty In Cyberspace, Gary Corn, Robert Taylor

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In Sorerejgntyin Cyberspace: Lex Lata Vel Non?, Michael Schmitt and Liis Vihul argue that territorial sovereignty is a primary rule of international law that limits cyber activities. They recognize, however, that not all cyber effects constitute violations of territorial sovereignty, and like Rule 4 in the Tallinn Manual 2.0 and its commentary, they acknowledge a distinct lack of consensus among the Tallinn participants on the critical question of applicable thresholds. Problematically, they do not identify the necessary state practice and opinio juris that would be required to establish either the primary rule that they proffer or the existence and contours …