Tomorrow morning (Wednesday, July 25), from 8-10 am, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse -- along with DOJ’s former Assistant Attorney General for National Security, David Kris and DOJ’s former Principal Attorney General, David Bitkower, among others -- will be on the hill to launch CSIS’s new report, Low-Hanging Fruit: Evidence-Based Solutions to the Digital Evidence Challenge, co-authored by the two of us. The report focuses on the range of challenges with accessing and
Jennifer Daskal joined American University Washington College of Law (WCL) in 2013 as an Assistant Professor of Law. She teaches and writes in the fields of criminal law, national security law, and constitutional law. From 2009-2011, Daskal was counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Department of Justice and, among other things, served on the Secretary of Defense and Attorney General-led Detention Policy Task Force. Prior to joining DOJ, she was the senior counterterrorism counsel at Human Rights Watch, worked as a staff attorney for the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia, and clerked for the Honorable Jed S. Rakoff. She spent two years before joining WCL’s faculty as a national security law fellow and adjunct professor at Georgetown Law Center.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
A recent Board of Immigration Appeals case concluded that a woman who was kidnapped and forced into labor for El Salvadoran guerrillas is a material supporter of terrorism and therefore ineligible for asylum.
Does the Cloud Act let the United States enter into an agreement with the EU as a whole?
In order to fully realize the goals of the Cloud Act, several key issues should be considered in the formulation and negotiation of Section 5 executive agreements.
Jennifer Daskal and Peter Swire respond to Neema Singh Guliani and Naureen Shah’s critique of the CLOUD Act.
Privacy and human rights groups shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Jennifer Daskal examines the potential international side effects of the policies proposed in the encryption debate and highlights the need to proceed with care, and for centralized, executive-level review and monitoring of sought-after decryption orders, so as to better account for these effects.