Skip to content

Posts by Lauren Bateman

Lauren Bateman is a student at Harvard Law School, where she is an editor of the Harvard Law Review. She previously worked as a National Security Legislative Correspondent for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and she takes a special interest in legislative procedure. She also interned for the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Nevada, and was a Research Fellow for the Project on National Security Reform. She graduated with a B.A., magna cum laude, in History and Government from The College of William & Mary in 2009.

Read Out: Hearing on DOJ’s State Secrets Claim in Restis v. UANI

By
Sunday, October 12, 2014 at 4:00 PM

The transcript of Judge Edgardo Ramos’ Wednesday hearing in Restis v. United Against Nuclear Iran (“UANI”) is in—and full of fascinating questions about the government’s use of the state secrets privilege.   As we reported earlier, the case is notable because the government took the unusual (though not completely unprecedented) step of intervening in a private lawsuit to assert the privilege.  The move provoked . . .
Read more »

Government Asserts State Secrets Privilege in Defamation Suit Against Non-Profit

By
Monday, September 22, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Last week—and in a somewhat unusual development—the Department of Justice filed a motion to intervene, stay, and dismiss a private lawsuit against a non-profit organization, citing the state secrets privilege. In short, the United States believes that the litigation’s further progress might risk the release of national security information.  United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is a private non-profit group . . .
Read more »

8/5 Motions Hearing #4: On the MCA’s Constitutionality and Statutes of Limitation

By
Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 8:16 PM

Judge Spath then moves to AE 295, a defense filing and the penultimate item on the agenda.  It’s a constitutional broadside against the commissions’ authorizing legislation. Major Hurley rises for the defense and asks that all charges be dismissed against al-Nashiri, “because the Military Commissions Act of 2009 is unconstitutional, specifically because it is designed . . .
Read more »

8/5 Motions Hearing #3: Cole Photographs and the Yemen Friendship Agreement

By
Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 6:12 PM

In the final session for the day, Judge Spath announces he has come to a ruling on AE277.  This is the defense’s bid for Al-Nashiri to have an MRI examination, presumably in order to unearth the damage wrought by his abuse at CIA hands. The item had been the subject of a secret Rule 505(h) . . .
Read more »

8/5 Motions Hearing #2: Things Classified

By
Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 9:15 AM

When the Court reconvenes, Major Tom Hurley begins argument on AE 280. In it, the defense requests that summaries of classified discovery be marked with more granular classification information.  Specifically, the defense objects to the government’s practice of marking whole documents as classified; instead, the defense wants the government to go through the process of reviewing the . . .
Read more »

8/5 Motions Hearing #1: Death Penalty Procedures and Mitigation Experts

By
Tuesday, August 5, 2014 at 10:10 PM

The military judge, Air Force Col. Vance Spath, begins the morning’s hearing in United States v. Al-Nashiri—his second on the case—by ruling on two pending motions. First, Judge Spath grants defense motion AE 305, in which the detainee’s lawyers had asked the new military judge to block his predecessor, Army Col. James L. Pohl from resolving certain outstanding motions . . .
Read more »

Senators Express Concern on 702 Interpretation

By
Sunday, July 27, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Ellen Nakashima at the Washington Post reports that four U.S. Senators—Jon Tester, Jeff Merkley, Mark Begich, and John Walsh—wrote a July 24th letter to DNI Clapper expressing their concerns with NSA’s interpretation of Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. They pull heavily from the PCLOB report released earlier this month, in which the Board observed that . . .
Read more »

Foreign Purchases of U.S. Businesses, Presidential Power, and National Security: Ralls Corp. v. CFIUS

By
Friday, April 11, 2014 at 11:00 AM

When then-Representative Barney Frank contemplated the ability of foreign interests to acquire American companies at the expense of national security, he made the following statement: There is no right to buy.  You do not have to file [with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), but by not filing, you do not immunize . . .
Read more »

On The Recent FISC Preservation Rulings

By
Thursday, April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

When last we checked in on the metadata preservation saga, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had authorized the government—in contravention of its prior order—to retain metadata beyond the FISA-imposed five year limit in order to account for evidence preservation issues being litigated by civil plaintiffs in suits against the NSA in the Northern District of California.  On . . .
Read more »

New FISC Order On Retention of Metadata

By
Wednesday, March 12, 2014 at 9:11 PM

On Monday, we reported on the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by Judge Jeffrey S. White of the Northern District of California, which prohibited the government from destroying telephone metadata collected by the NSA, pursuant to Section 215 of the Patriot Act.  The idea was to preserve the metadata, as evidence for potential use in pending civil . . .
Read more »

District Court in California Contradicts FISC, Orders Government to Preserve Metadata

By
Monday, March 10, 2014 at 10:37 PM

Earlier today, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White of the Northern District of California issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the government from destroying call record metadata in the 215 program.  “It is undisputed,” he wrote, “that the Court would be unable to afford effective relief once the records are destroyed, and therefore the harm to Plaintiffs . . .
Read more »

FISC Rejects Government’s Request to Retain Metadata Beyond Five Years

By
Saturday, March 8, 2014 at 2:40 PM

FISC Presiding Judge Reggie B. Walton yesterday rejected the government’s request to retain telephony metadata beyond five years. On January 3, 2014, the FISC approved the government’s request to collect telephony metadata from certain telecommunications carriers.  That order adopted the government’s suggested minimization procedures, including the standard requirement that all metadata collected under the order be destroyed within . . .
Read more »

The Crimean Crisis: Commentary on International Law Ramifications

By
Monday, March 3, 2014 at 2:34 PM

As a service to Lawfare readers, we have compiled some other web commentary on the legal aspects of the crisis in Crimea.  (Of course, interested folks should have a look at Ashley’s thorough articulation of the international law issues at play, and Paul’s take on the invasion’s cyber dimension.) While the situation percolated over the weekend, Eric Posner noted the (somewhat surprising) . . .
Read more »

Statutory Authority, Military Installations and Protests: Today’s Supreme Court Ruling in United States v. Apel

By
Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 7:01 PM

Federal law criminalizes the reentry of a “military . . . installation” after having been ordered not to do so by “any officer or person in command.”  18 U.S.C. § 1382.  But does that criminal prohibition apply to areas specifically designated by the military as civilian “protest areas”? Today, in United States v. Apel, the Supreme Court . . .
Read more »

Judge Pauley’s Section 215 Opinion: A Summary

By
Saturday, December 28, 2013 at 5:00 PM

As Raffaela reported, on Friday Judge William H. Pauley III of the Southern District of New York held that bulk telephony metadata collection under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act is lawful, and therefore granted the government’s motion to dismiss in ACLU v. Clapper.  (For additional analysis, please see Ben and Peter‘s posts.) BACKGROUND The opinion begins with a background on . . .
Read more »

The November NSA Trove V: Congressional Stuff

By
Thursday, November 21, 2013 at 7:30 PM

Our little November NSA Trove-a-thon will shift gears now.  Having covered judicial materials—court filings, opinions, and similar items regarding NSA’s bulk collection of telephony and internet metadata—we’ll move to congressional oversight of those same subjects. So far as this post goes, that will mean time-traveling back to two historical documents: first, 2005 congressional testimony by . . .
Read more »

The November NSA Trove IV: The Internet Metadata Collection Story Develops

By and
Thursday, November 21, 2013 at 1:30 PM

Your latest dispatch from the November NSA Trove: a trio of judicial opinions on internet metadata acquired, in bulk, by means of pen register and trap-and-trace (“PR/TT”) devices.  (Recall that, in 2004, the FISC initially approved this, in an opinion by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.) The  rulings are apparently divided by considerable time, with the first . . .
Read more »

Government Files Brief in D.C. Circuit Gitmo Detainee Civil Case

By
Monday, November 18, 2013 at 10:35 AM

The government has filed its brief in Al Laithi v. Rumsfeld and Celikgogus v. Rumsfeld, a case involving the consolidated claims of former Guantanamo detainees against former government officials in their individual capacities. The detainees seek civil damages, alleging that their detentions had violated international law, the Constitution, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Holding that these types of . . .
Read more »

Supreme Court Denies EPIC Mandamus Petition

By
Monday, November 18, 2013 at 10:31 AM

The Supreme Court today denied the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s request for mandamus review of telephony metadata collection under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. The denial order has neither dissent nor further explication. Josh Gerstein’s article in Politico provides good background on the case; for more information, see our previous post on this issue as well . . .
Read more »

CIA Files Reply Memo in Drone FOIA Case

By
Saturday, November 2, 2013 at 9:07 PM

The CIA’s efforts to deny the ACLU’s FOIA requests for records about the Agency’s involvement in drone-based targeted killings continue apace in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Agency filed a reply memorandum in favor of summary judgment  on the matter in D.D.C. on November 1. Lawfare readers may recall the March . . .
Read more »