John Bies’s Sept. 30 post (“Giuliani Cannot Rely on Attorney-Client Privilege to Avoid Congressional Testimony”) is informative but doesn’t quite explain the full scope of a lawyer’s confidentiality responsibilities, nor does it address the implications of Congress compelling an attorney to breach them.
Charles J. Dunlap is a retired Air Force major general who is currently a Professor of the Practice of Law, and Executive Director of the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke Law School.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
In the runup to Memorial Day, numerous writers denounced President Trump’s purported plans to grant clemency to several U.S. service members accused or convicted of war-zone offenses.
I find much to applaud in Maj. (P) Dan Maurer’s thoughtful Lawfare post on potential unlawful command influence (UCI) issues associated with the president’s tweet about the controversial case of Maj.
Much controversy has arisen over the appointment of Matthew Whitaker as the acting attorney general.
In “'Okay, Let’s Go': Watching the New York Times on Trump” Benjamin Wittes largely extols Liz Garbus’s new documentary series, "The Fourth Estate" which chronicles the New York Times in the Trump era.
My friends Jack Goldsmith and Oona Hathaway published two essays in which they expertly propound what I must concede is probably the opinion of many if not most scholars: that the recent strikes on Syria violated both domestic and international law.
Allow me to offer a different view.
In announcing that 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were being charged for “seeking to interfere in the United States political system,” Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made it clear that the indictment contained “no allegation … that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.” Could a future indictment show that? Maybe, but I think that’s unlikely. Here’s why.